ABOUT THE AMERICAN METHANOL INSTITUTE
As the voice of the methanol industry, AMI works with auto manufac- turers and government agencies to accelerate the introduction of electric fuel cell vehicles powered by methanol. AMI helps inform elected officials and the public about the energy security, greenhouse gas and other environmental benefits of methanol fuel cell technology. Leading portable power equipment, telecommunications, and consumer electronics companies, with AMI s support, expect to intro- duce garden and camping equipment, cellular telephones and other methanol-powered fuel cell products in the near future.
AMI encourages the development of new markets for methanol s use, such as its vital role in reducing the discharge of nitrogen into the sensitive Chesapeake Bay from the Blue Plains wastewater treatment facility which serves the nation s capital. The Institute is encouraging the development of methanol-from-landfill gas technology, finding a productive use for methane gas emissions that would otherwise be vented or flared to the atmosphere contributing to global warming.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report benefited greatly from the support and guidance of the AMI Board of Directors, led by the chairman of AMI s Market Development Committee, William R. Bell (Synetix). The AMI Board of Directors includes Wayne Wright (Methanex Corporation); Roger Seward (Lyondell Methanol Company); Burton Joyce (Terra Industries); Bob Gengelbach (Celanese); Mohammed Al-Bat hi (Sabic Americas, Inc.); Rampersad Motilal (Methanol Holdings Trinidad Ltd.); Jim Prentice (Enron Clean Fuels); and John Lynn (AMI President and CEO).
AMI s Market Development Committee provided considerable assistance with the preparation of this report, including Mark Allard (Methanex Corporation); Tim Clifford (AMPCO); Raymond Lewis; Doug MacMillan (Terra Nitrogen); Glyn Short; Ed Swinderman (Lyondell Petrochemical Company); Steve Skasko (Saturn Methanol Company); Michael Walsh; Peter Ward (California Energy Commission); John White (V. John White and Associates); Bob Wright (Methanex Corporation); and Paul Wuebben (South Coast Air Quality Management District).
A number of external reviewers offered their expert comments on draft versions of this report. These reviewers included Debby Harris (Ballard Automotive); Johannes Ebner (DaimlerChrysler); James Larkins (Georgetown University); Jason Mark (Union of Concerned Scientists); Stefan Unnasch (A.D. Little); Peter Iwanowicz (American Lung Association of New York State); and Dr. Shannon Baxter (California Air Resources Board). It is understood that none of the persons listed above bear responsibility for the report s findings and recommendations. PREPARED FOR THE AMERICAN METHANOL INSTITUTE BY BREAKTHROUGH TECHNOLOGIES INSTITUTE
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE 6
WHAT IS A FUEL CELL? 8
WHO IS DEVELOPING METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES? 12
WHAT ARE THE SAFETY AND HEALTH IMPACTS OF METHANOL USE? 18
WHY IS METHANOL NOT THE SAME AS MTBE? 20
HOW WILL METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES REDUCE URBAN AIR POLLUTION? 22
HOW WILL METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES ADDRESS THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT? 24
HOW WILL METHANOL FUEL CELL USE ADDRESS WATER POLLUTION? 26
WHERE WILL I BUY METHANOL FUEL? 28
HOW MUCH WILL I PAY FOR METHANOL FUEL? 30
HOW MUCH METHANOL WILL BE NEEDED TO SERVE THE MARKET? 32
IS THERE ENOUGH NATURAL GAS? 34
WILL METHANOL BE MADE FROM FLARED NATURAL GAS? 36
WILL RENEWABLE FEEDSTOCKS BE USED FOR METHANOL PRODUCTION? 38
ARE THERE OTHER POTENTIAL METHANOL FEEDSTOCK SOURCES? 40
WHAT ARE THE STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS OF A WORLD METHANOL MARKET? 42
AREN’T GASOLINE FUEL CELLS AND GASOLINE/BATTERY HYBRIDS BETTER? 44
HOW DO WE ENCOURAGE THE INTRODUCTION OF MFCVs? 46
BIBLIOGRAPHY 50 2 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
“WITHIN THE WIDELY DISCUSSED QUESTION
OF WHETHER HYDROGEN OR METHANOL IS
THE RIGHT FUEL FOR FUEL CELLS ethanol a convenient liquid fuel made
WE BET ON METHANOL from natural gas or renewable resources
FOR THE PASSENGER CARS... is a leading candidate to provide the
MOREOVER, TODAY’S DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM hydrogen necessary to power fuel cell Mvehicles (FCVs). In the last few years, much progress has CAN BE ADJUSTED IN A COST EFFECTIVE
WAY TO ACCOMMODATE METHANOL, been made in bringing methanol fuel cell technology closer
INCLUDING THE FUTURE OPTION OF to the marketplace. Also known as wood alcohol, methanol
PRODUCTION FROM RENEWABLES.” has been in commerce for over 350 years since 1648. Methanol s widespread global use has focused primarily on DR. FERDINAND PANIK, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FUEL CELL PROGRAMS FOR DAIMLERCHRYSLER, AND PRESIDENT OF XCELLSIS its value as a building block for thousands of consumer September 2000 products from plastics and paints, to construction materials and windshield washer fluid. The American Methanol Institute (AMI) has prepared this report to highlight the ongoing advances in methanol s use with emerging fuel cell technology, address economic and environmental issues surrounding the use of methanol fuels, and explore likely paths to achieving a successful market introduction of methanol fuel cell vehicles (MFCVs).
IMPORTANT FINDINGS
◗ The world s major automakers are racing to introduce FCVs to the market. Many demonstrations, advancements and breakthroughs have been achieved with methanol fuel cells.
◗ Automotive industry leaders conclude that within two decades, between 7 and 20 percent of new cars sold in the world will be powered by fuel cells. We can envision a global fleet of 40 million FCVs on the road by 2020.
◗ With fuel cell technology now moving out of the labora- tory, the research emphasis has shifted to reducing costs in preparation for mass production. A few years ago, the
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 3 wastewater treatment plants in the United States add THE WORLD METHANOL INDUSTRY HAS A methanol to accelerate the removal of nitrates in the final SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE GLOBAL stages of sewage treatment before the wastewater is ECONOMY, GENERATING OVER $12 BILLION discharged into sensitive oceans and rivers. IN ANNUAL ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
WHILE CREATING OVER 100,000 ◗ Full fuel-cycle carbon dioxide emissions and other green-
DIRECT AND INDIRECT JOBS. house gases from a MFCV will be less than half of those for today s gasoline internal combustion vehicle. With an fuel cell stack only one part of the whole fuel cell power estimated global fleet of 40 million MFCVs by 2020, we system cost a prohibitive $5,000 per kilowatt, the equiv- expect the total well-to-wheel CO2 emissions from a MFCV to alent of buying an engine for $250,000. The entire fuel cell be 243.5 equivalent grams per mile, versus 461.9 equivalent system cost (fuel cell stack, methanol reformer and associ- grams per mile for a gasoline ICE car. Assuming that each car ated controls) is now down to $300 per kW, and developers is driven 12,000 miles per year, the annual equivalent CO2 are targeting full power system costs in the range of $50 per emission reductions from the global fleet of MFCVs would kW with high-volume production. A 50-kW fuel cell system reach a staggering 104 million metric tons. for a vehicle would cost, therefore, about $2,500, compa- ◗ It will cost less than $500 million to adapt 10 percent of rable to the cost for today s internal combustion engine the refueling stations in California, New York, (ICE). Massachusetts, Germany, and Japan to methanol operation. ◗ Methanol is one of the safest and most environmentally Even converting 25 percent of the stations in these target sound fuels available. In the United States, there are over areas would only amount to $1.2 billion. 180,000 vehicle fires each year in which gasoline is the first ◗ In 2000, worldwide methanol production capacity stands material to ignite. According to the Environmental at 12.5 billion gallons (37.5 million tons) per year, with a Protection Agency (EPA), a switch to methanol could utilization rate of just under 80 percent. The world methanol reduce the incidence of these fires by 90 percent, saving industry has a significant impact on the global economy, 720 lives, preventing nearly 3,900 serious injuries, and generating over $12 billion in annual economic activity while reducing property losses by millions of dollars. creating over 100,000 direct and indirect jobs. ◗ While methanol is used as a feedstock in the production ◗ Under initial market penetration assumptions, estimates of the gasoline additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE); reveal that by the year 2010, automakers will have introduced methanol and MTBE are two different chemicals with nearly 500,000 MFCVs. If each vehicle travels 12,000 miles entirely different effects on groundwater and drinking annually, using 436 gallons of methanol (achieving 55 miles- water. Both methanol and MTBE are highly soluble in water per-gasoline equivalent gallon), overall demand would reach and poorly adsorb to subsurface soil, the similarity in the 218 million gallons of methanol per annum, or less than 2 behavior of the two compounds in the environment ends percent of current world capacity. there. Ubiquitous in nature, methanol is easily and quickly degraded in the environment by a diverse range of microor- ◗ Today, methanol is being produced from otherwise flared ganisms under most environmental conditions that use or vented natural gas in many other parts of the world. If methanol as a source of carbon and energy. Compared to only 10 percent of the natural gas flared each year was made gasoline, the environmental impacts of methanol are much available for the methanol fuel market; it would be enough more benign. to power 9.5 million FCVs annually.
◗ Due to its high rate of biodegradation, more than 100 ◗ Technology to produce methanol from renewable feedstocks such as wood, municipal solid waste, agricultural feedstocks and sewage has been widely demonstrated.
4 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE ESSENTIAL RECOMMENDATIONS Establish a mechanism to monetize the value of CO2 emission reductions. Successful emission trading systems Establish incentives for the purchase and operation have been established to buy and sell emission reductions of FCVs. Legislation has been introduced in the U.S. achieved by stationary facilities for several pollutants. An Congress to provide a 25¢ per gasoline-equivalent gallon tax emission trading system should be established for CO2 credit for the use of methanol and other natural gas-based emissions, which would provide a mechanism for the inclu- fuels. This legislation provides short-term incentives that sion of emission reductions such as those from MFCVs. will be critical in helping to build the market for fuel cell vehicles so that economies of scale can be achieved to Support the fuel cell work of the Partnership reduce vehicle costs. for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV). This public/private partnership has identified fuel cell vehicles Use Corporate Average Fuel Economy Credits. The as one of its technology options for developing highly Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988 established a Corporate efficient vehicles. Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program for vehicles fueled with alcohol or natural gas. By accumulating significant Encourage the use of aggressive marketing campaigns CAFE credits from the sale of MFCVs, automakers can offset for FCVs. Automakers have come to realize the significant the lower mileage ratings from larger vehicles (like SUVs consumer enthusiasm for clean, advanced technology and minivans) that are generally more profitable than vehicles. The market introduction of MFCVs will create even smaller, higher mileage vehicles. broader opportunities for educating consumers to the benefits and availability of this technology. Develop specifications for methanol fuel for FCVs. In 1999, representatives of the oil, automotive and methanol Increase funding for research in DMFC technologies. industries formed the Methanol Specification Council to DMFCs hold great promise for reducing size, weight, cost, develop readily accepted specifications for the safe and emissions and improving energy efficiency for a broad array effective use of methanol in MFCVs. of applications. The efforts of national laboratory, university and private researchers should be directed to accelerating the Provide credit for MFCVs in regulatory policies pace of development of this important technology. encouraging the use of electric vehicles. The State of California requires that 10 percent of the vehicles sold in Model Year 2003 must be zero emission vehicles (ZEVs). MFCVs qualify for the highest level of partial ZEV credits. Direct methanol fuel cell (DMFC) vehicles fully qualify as ZEVs.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 5 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE
“I BELIEVE FUEL CELL VEHICLES
FINALLY WILL END THE HUNDRED-YEAR
REIGN OF THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION uel cell technology has proven itself as a greener alter-
ENGINE AS THE DOMINANT SOURCE OF native to internal combustion engines, there is no
POWER FOR PERSONAL TRANSPORTATION. doubt about that. Now there is an intense international
IT’S GOING TO BE A WINNING SITUATION competition to commercialize fuel cell vehicles, and a Frace to make the technology affordable and appealing to the ALL THE WAY AROUND — CONSUMERS
WILL GET AN EFFICIENT POWER SOURCE, consuming public. The FCV driving experience will be much
COMMUNITIES WILL GET ZERO EMISSIONS, quieter and require much less maintenance. Imagine no oil
AND AUTOMAKERS WILL GET ANOTHER changes for your car, no noise from the explosive ignition of
MAJOR BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY — fuel within an engine block, greatly reduced maintenance
A GROWTH OPPORTUNITY.” repairs such as valve jobs, ring jobs, starter replacements, timing adjustments and timing belt replacements. Fewer WILLIAM C. FORD, JR., FORD CHAIRMAN International Auto Show, January 2000 moving parts means greater reliability and longer vehicle life, saving the operator time and expense. Every major auto company in the world is developing fuel cells, in the lab and increasingly on the road. Fleet testing began in 2000 under the California Fuel Cell Partnership. Since a fuel cell engine also acts as a portable generator, companies that commercialize FCVs will also help revolutionize the way the world thinks about energy. Dr. Ferdinand Panik, DaimlerChrysler s senior vice presi- dent, Fuel Cell Programs and president of XCELLSIS, claims that by 2020, a conservative prediction holds that at least 7 percent of new cars sold in the world will be FCVs. His optimistic estimate is a 20 percent market share. In 1999, global sales of automobiles topped 56 million vehicles. Taking Dr. Panik s estimate, by 2020, 4.2 million to 12 million new fuel cell cars will be sold each year, based on new car sales of 60 million units per year. Ford Motor Company Chairman, William C. Ford, Jr., has apparently gone a step further, stating that the fuel cell could become the predominant automotive power source in 25 years. Fuel cells have undergone astonishingly rapid develop- ment in the past several years, driven by the world s leading
6 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE METHANOL (CH3OH) — a convenient liquid fuel made from natural gas or renewable resources — is a leading candidate to provide the hydrogen necessary to power fuel cell vehicles, the next generation of automotive technology. The commercialization of methanol-powered fuel cells will offer practical, affordable, long-range electric vehicles with zero or near-zero emissions while retaining the convenience of an economical liquid fuel. By 2004 or sooner, fuel cells operating on methanol will power a variety of vehicles in the United States and worldwide.
industrial giants, high-tech startups, universities, national saws and leaf blowers. Perhaps the first large consumer laboratories and government agencies. In fact, fuel cells introduction will be for residential power, allowing already provide clean, reliable, stationary electric power in homeowners to back up or even bypass the electric utility hospitals, hotels, schools and computer centers in the grid. These are exciting and promising markets for fuel cells. United States, Europe and Japan. A host of smaller applica- However, since the vehicle market will be a dominant influ- tions for fuel cells as battery replacements in consumer ence, this report focuses on the automotive sector. electronics like cellular phones and laptop computers will AMI has prepared this second report to highlight the enter the marketplace in the next few years. Other ongoing advances in methanol fuel cell technology, address promising markets include displacing highly-polluting, small economic and environmental questions about the use of two-cycle engines sold each year in nearly 8 million pieces methanol fuels and explore likely paths to achieving the of portable power equipment such as lawn mowers, chain- promise of methanol fuel cell vehicles.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 7 WHAT IS A FUEL CELL? WHAT IS A FUEL CELL?
“WE BELIEVE [FUEL CELL] TECHNOLOGY HAS
THE POSSIBILITY OF BECOMING MAIN STREET
TECHNOLOGY, NOT NICHE TECHNOLOGY.” fuel cell reverses the process of electrolysis in which an electric current breaks down water FIROZ RASUL, CHAIRMAN AND CEO OF BALLARD POWER SYSTEMS The Detroit News, November 30, 1999 into its constituent oxygen and hydrogen gases. In 1839, British scientist Sir William ARobert Grove s discovery that hydrogen and oxygen gas can be recombined to produce water and electric current gave birth to the fuel cell. While there are several types of fuel cells, the proton exchange membrane or PEM fuel cell is the leading contender for vehicle applications. The PEM is a thin wafer- like material that allows hydrogen ions to pass through it. The membrane is coated on both sides with highly dispersed metal alloy particles (mostly platinum) that are active catalysts. Hydrogen is fed to the anode side of the fuel cell where the catalyst encourages the hydrogen atoms to release electrons and become hydrogen ions (protons) (see Figure 1). The electrons travel in the form of an electric current that can be utilized before it returns to the cathode side of the fuel cell where oxygen has been fed. At the same time, the protons diffuse through the membrane to the cathode, where the hydrogen atom is recombined and reacted with oxygen to produce water, thus completing the overall process. To produce a practical fuel cell, each thin wafer is stacked with others into an assembly that is carefully designed to allow for hydrogen to be supplied to the anode sides and oxygen to the cathode sides of each cell. The entire fuel cell unit also must manage spare heat produced by the process, and remove oxygen-depleted air and excess water. All fuel cells need hydrogen in some form. On vehicles, hydrogen can be stored as a cryogenic liquid or as a pressurized gas. But liquefying hydrogen to -253…C is expen- sive and highly energy-intensive, and storing this fuel on a vehicle is a difficult engineering task. Storing hydrogen as a
8 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE gas requires significant reformer PEM. It will FIGURE 1 • SCHEMATIC OF THE DIRECT METHANOL FUEL CELL energy expenditure for require a very low- or compression, stringent no-sulfur fuel, with low DC MOTOR safety precautions, and – + aromatics that is not yet bulky, heavy storage e- e- commercially available. tanks. Natural gas The process by which (methane or CH4) is ➥ this very low-sulfur,
CO2 used as a hydrogen CO2 N2 gasoline-like hydro- Methanol/Water ➥ O2 source in some fuel ➥ carbon fuel is broken Oxidant cell designs for large, Fuel down to feed into the ➥ Air (O2) 3% Methanol/Water POSITIVE ELECTRODE NEGATIVE ELECTRODE NEGATIVE stationary electricity MEMBRANE POLYMER fuel cell is referred to generating stations. as partial oxidation Source: Jet Propulsion Laboratory But it, too, presents (POX). POX systems many of the weight operate at much higher and space limitations of cryogenic liquefaction or compres- temperatures than steam-reforming and are less fuel- sion when considering mobile applications. efficient. POX systems may have the advantage of being fuel Methanol emerges as an ideal hydrogen carrier for flexible, that is, capable of operating on a variety of fuels vehicles because it is liquid at room temperature and such as gasoline, methanol, ethanol or natural gas. A POX ambient pressure. Methanol is a simple molecule consisting system designed as a multi-fuel processor will produce high of a single carbon atom linked to three hydrogen atoms and levels of carbon monoxide (CO), requiring the use of a large- one oxygen-hydrogen bond. Releasing the hydrogen bonds scale gas clean up system adding to the overall system s in a methanol molecule is easier to accomplish than with complexity, weight and cost. A methanol-fueled POX system other liquid fuels. Moreover, methanol fuel contains no would be far simpler, operating at a lower temperature and sulfur, which is a fuel-cell contaminant, has no carbon-to- producing less CO. While the hydrocarbon POX system is carbon atomic bonds which are hard to break, and has the still being developed in the laboratory, the methanol steam highest possible hydrogen-to-carbon ratio. In fact, a gallon reformer PEM fuel cell has demonstrated its potential in on- of methanol fuel contains even more hydrogen than the the-road prototype vehicles, and is likely to be on board the same volume of cryogenic liquid hydrogen. first commercial fuel cell vehicles. Operating at relatively low temperatures, a methanol Researchers at NASA s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in steam reformer easily splits the methanol molecule to Pasadena, CA; the University of Southern California; the produce the hydrogen needed by the stack, which then California Institute of Technology; Los Alamos National generates electricity to power the vehicle. The presence of Laboratory, and other institutions are developing direct the reformer in this design has advantages and disadvantages. methanol fuel cell (DMFC) technology. No reformer is An advantage is that the reformer rapidly and efficiently needed in this fuel cell methanol is injected directly to delivers hydrogen to the fuel cell from a liquid fuel that is the cell s anode. There, the liquid methanol reacts to form easy to distribute and store on the vehicle. The disadvantage electricity and carbon dioxide. Companies such as is that the reformer may produce trace emissions as it burns DaimlerChrysler, Ballard Power Systems, Giner Inc., some of the methanol and hydrogen to provide the necessary Motorola, Manhattan Scientifics, and Energy Ventures, Inc. heat of reaction. Moreover, the reformer adds weight, (EVI) have completed preliminary stages of research, devel- complexity and cost to the overall system. opment and demonstration of DMFC technology. Gasoline also can be used as a hydrogen source in a PEM Much progress has been made with miniature fuel cells fuel cell; however, the commercial development of this for a range of small consumer applications such as cellular technology is less advanced than the methanol steam phones and laptop computers and portable power equip-
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 9 ment such as lawnmowers potential of the DMFC is FIGURE 2 • JEEP COMMANDER 2 FUEL CELL SYSTEM and leaf blowers. yet another good reason Commercialization of for early FCVs to be miniature fuel cells is designed for methanol, predicted to take place in eliminating the need for 2001 or 2002. Motorola a second fuel transition. researchers have devel- The challenges facing oped a miniature fuel cell PEM fuel cell developers that could power a are threefold: 1) Reduce wireless phone for more the cost to build the than a month and keep a electrode plates; 2) laptop running for 20 Reduce the amount of hours. The fuel cell runs expensive platinum used on less than one ounce of as a catalyst; and 3) liquid methanol stored in Design a cheap and effec- small plastic canisters similar to those used for fountain pens. tive membrane. Enormous progress has been made in each The mini-cells measure about one inch square and less than area. A few years ago, the fuel cell stack only one part of one-tenth of an inch in thickness, and will likely be compa- the fuel cell power system (see Figure 2) cost a prohibitive rable in cost to traditional rechargeable batteries. The $5,000 per kilowatt (kW). The entire fuel cell system cost benefits of increased energy density (power for several days (fuel cell stack, reformer and associated controls) has now rather than several hours), and eliminated time spent been reduced to $300 per kW (based on mass production recharging portable electronic devices will be extremely economies), and developers are targeting full power system attractive to the consumer. Motorola and other companies costs in the range of $50 per kW with high-volume produc- manufacturing small fuel cells can be expected to conduct tion. A 50-kW power system for a vehicle would cost about intense education and outreach to help raise awareness and $2,500, similar to the cost for today s internal combustion drive consumer demand for methanol fuel cells, which will engine (ICE). The key to reducing the price of a fuel cell spill over into numerous market applications. system is to reduce the costs of the subsystems. The DMFC vehicle will eliminate emissions of nitrogen Ballard Power Systems has led the way, reducing plate oxide (NOx) and hydrocarbons, making it a true zero costs from $100 per plate to about $1. According to a report emission vehicle, under standards set by the California by Arthur D. Little, 99.99 percent pure materials (high purity Air Resources Board specialized graphite) (CARB). The DMFC used for the bipolar offers other significant plates may cost as benefits due to its little as $1.75 to $2 inherent simplicity. per pound, drastically Eliminating the need to reducing overall costs. include a steam reformer Working with Johnson and its associated Matthey, Ballard Power controls will reduce Systems has curbed its vehicle weight and platinum usage to costs and thereby roughly the cost of further improve fuel catalyst used in the economy. The great catalytic converters
10 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE found in today s cars. The major manufacturer of Matthey s HotSpot methanol reformer achieved start-up times membranes, DuPont, has announced that future membranes of 20 seconds for 50 percent hydrogen production, and full will cost no more than $10 per square-foot when large production in only 50 seconds. This fuel processor system production volumes are achieved, stating that the price was also highly efficient, releasing 89 percent of the could drop to nearly $5 per square-foot. hydrogen contained in the methanol fuel. Additional progress Many of the challenges facing reformer developers are has been made since. XCELLSIS engineers have reduced the being met with equal zeal. From a cold start, reformers need weight and volume of the complete methanol reformer to produce hydrogen quickly. Tremendous progress has been system, increasing process efficiency. made in this area. For example, a few years ago Johnson
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 11 WHO IS DEVELOPING METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES?
“FUEL CELL VEHICLES WILL PROBABLY
OVERTAKE GASOLINE-POWERED CARS
IN THE NEXT 20 TO 30 YEARS.” any automotive manufacturers are racing to be the first to bring a fuel cell vehicle to the TAKEO FUKUI, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, HONDA MOTOR CO. Bloomberg News, June 5, 1999 marketplace. Automakers and component suppliers are spending billions of dollars to Mdrive fuel cell technology toward commercialization. Some are concentrating on using pure hydrogen, while others are trying to find ways to use gasoline-like hydrocarbons. The non-hydrogen fuel choice that is the most advanced techni- cally, has the most potential, and likely will be used in the first commercial vehicles is methanol, either reformed into hydrogen on-board the vehicle or used directly in the fuel cell. MFCVs offer virtually all the environmental benefits of battery electric vehicles (EVs), while retaining the perfor- mance and range of today s internal combustion engine (ICE), and the convenience of filling up with a liquid fuel without the energy security risks of further dependence on foreign sources of crude oil. The energy efficiency of fuel cells also makes them an attractive alternative for automakers. Several studies have modeled the potential energy efficiency of FCVs. Argonne National Laboratory estimates that MFCVs will achieve a fuel economy 2.1 to 2.6 times greater than an ICE car. The Pembina Institute for Appropriate Technology assumes that MFCVs will achieve efficiencies of 1.76 times that of a gasoline ICE. For purposes of this report, we will rely on the fuel economy estimate of 1.74 times that of a gasoline ICE prepared by (S+T)2 for the Methanex Corporation (found at www.methanex.com). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA) 1999 assessment of automobile fuel efficiency shows that overall fuel economy for passenger vehicles (the average for cars and light-duty trucks combined) was 23.8 mpg, the
12 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE lowest since 1980 and six-tenths of a mile-per-gallon lower more than $200 per kW). Vehicles equipped with DC/AC than in 1998. The fuel economy for the entire U.S. fleet of inverters may provide abundant power for camping, new vehicles has been declining in recent years as light construction sites and other activities. Companies such as trucks and SUVs gain a greater market share. In its Freightliner, BMW and International Fuel Cells are working Reference Case, the U.S. Energy Information on using fuel cells as auxiliary power units (APUs) in trucks Administration s (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook 2000 and cars. This technology allows automakers to offer projects that new fuel vehicles with additional economy will grow to TABLE 1 • PROTOTYPE FUEL CELL VEHICLE INTRODUCTION features. For instance, 31.4 mpg by 2010. We can AUTOMAKER/VEHICLE TYPE YEAR SHOWN FUEL TYPE the air conditioning therefore assume that the system can be run while BMW fuel economy of the Series 7 Sedan In development hydrogen the car is parked and gasoline ICE will improve the engine switched off DAIMLERCHRYSLER to 32 mpg by 2010. NECAR (van) 1993 gaseous hydrogen to produce no Assuming a MFCV fuel NECAR 2 (mini-van) 1995 gaseous hydrogen emissions. Tractor- NECAR 3 (A-class) 1997 liquid methanol economy of 1.74 times trailer rigs could protect NECAR 4 (A-class) 1999 liquid hydrogen that of a gasoline ICE in Jeep Commander 2 (SUV) 2000 methanol cargo while stopped for 2010, the MFCV will NECAR 5 (A-class) 2000 liquid methanol extended periods using achieve over 55 mpg FORD MOTOR COMPANY the power generated gasoline gallon equivalent. P2000 HFC (sedan) 1999 hydrogen from a fuel cell, rather TH!NK FC5 2000 methanol Innovative changes in than running the diesel vehicle design and GENERAL MOTORS/OPEL engine. If hurricanes, Zafira (mini-van) 1998 methanol materials to reduce Precept 2000 hydrogen ice storms, thunder- vehicle weight and storms or tornadoes HONDA improve aerodynamics FCX-V1 1999 hydrogen have downed power will benefit FCVs as well FCX-V2 1999 methanol lines, it would even be as conventional vehicles. MAZDA possible to run many For this reason the Demio (compact car) 1997 hydrogen homes from a properly (stored in a metal hydride) public/private Partnership equipped fuel cell car. for a New Generation of NISSAN The automotive R’nessa (SUV) 1999 methanol Vehicles (PNGV) antici- industry is now moving pates that a fuel cell RENAULT fuel cell technology FEVER (station wagon) 1997 liquid hydrogen vehicle comparable to Laguna Estate 1998 liquid hydrogen from the laboratory to today s Ford Taurus or the street, by intro- TOYOTA Chevrolet Lumina will RAV 4 FCEV (SUV) 1996 hydrogen (stored in a metal ducing a list of achieve nearly 80 miles hydride) prototype vehicles. per gasoline-equivalent RAV 4 FCEV (SUV) 1997 methanol Table 1 lists the demon- gallon. strations to date from The MFCV also will the major automobile offer some unexpected benefits in terms of portable power. manufacturers. With 75,000 watts plus of electric power, a MFCV will be a In 1997, DaimlerChrysler displayed a prototype MFCV portable energy plant providing 10 to 15 times more output the compact NECAR 3, that featured a 50-kW methanol- than portable gasoline generators, that retail for $1,000 to powered fuel cell that ran the car and all standard features $1,400 and have rated capacities of 5,000 to 6,500 watts (or for passenger comfort. Earlier versions the NECAR 1 and
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 13 NECAR 2 were fueled by gaseous hydrogen stored in ously. The company unveiled a working methanol hybrid bulky high-pressure cylinders, as is Daimler s fuel cell- fuel cell system in the Jeep Commander 2 in October 2000. powered transit bus called the NEBUS. Daimler used vans The Jeep Commander 2, the first fully-functional fuel cell for its first two FCVs, while the space-saving features of vehicle from the Chrysler Group, supplements it s peak liquid methanol fuel allowed the automaker to produce the power output with an onboard battery pack. NECAR 3 as its smallest passenger car. The NECAR 4, Also in November 2000, DaimlerChrysler, along with demonstrated in late 1999, uses liquefied hydrogen at - Ballard Power Systems, demonstrated a DMFC prototype 253¡C. The NECAR 4 s fuel cell equipment is located in the one-person vehicle. The small three-kilowatt system is the floor, leaving passenger and cargo space intact or result of an ongoing collaboration between the research unaffected. The car goes 280 miles before refueling, travels groups of DaimlerChrysler and Ballard. up to 90 miles-per-hour and emits water vapor as exhaust. Mazda Motor Corporation is joining DaimlerChrysler DaimlerChrysler introduced the NECAR 5 in November Japan Holding Ltd. and Nippon Mitsubishi Oil Co., Ltd., in a 2000, a MFCV that is expected to serve as the pre-produc- government-supported project to demonstrate MFCVs. tion prototype. The company characterizes the present Daimler and Mazda will provide one car each for test runs, status of the fuel cell drive as fit for practical use. NECAR and Nippon Mitsubishi will provide the fuel needed for the 5 is the first vehicle in which the entire fuel cell system with tests. The project will cost more than 1 billion yen (US $9.3 methanol reformer has been accommodated within the million) and is expected to receive between 200 and 300 underbody of the Mercedes-Benz A-Class compact car. The million yen (between US$1.8 and $2.8 million) in support vehicle uses a Ballard Mark 900 fuel cell, and can carry five from Japan’s Ministry of International Trade and Industry. passengers and their luggage, to over 90 miles per hour. Early in 2000, Ford unveiled the TH!NK FC5, a family- DaimlerChrysler has not set sales targets for the car, but size sedan powered by XCELLSIS s latest methanol reformer is expected to introduce a few thousand units in 2004, with fuel cell electric powertrain. Ballard s Mark 900 fuel cell production increasing to between 50,000 and 100,000 units stack powering the FC5 is designed for manufacturing in annually by the end of the decade. Generally, it is believed automotive production volumes and is significantly more that with production volumes of greater than 100,000 powerful than any previous PEM fuel cell, generating 75-kW vehicles each year, FCVs will become cost-competitive with of power. It occupies half the space of Ballard’s previous traditional internal combustion cars. fuel cell, the Mark 700, and weighs about 30 percent less. In 1998, DaimlerChrysler unveiled a fuel cell concept Based on the 2000 Ford Focus, the TH!NK FC5 s fuel cell vehicle based on the Jeep Commander, with the original powertrain is located beneath the vehicle floor, so it doesn t goal of having a fuel cell/battery hybrid engine that utilized compromise passenger and cargo space. gasoline as its fuel. Since then, DaimlerChrysler has put Prior to the TH!NK FC5, Ford introduced the P2000 gasoline reformer technology on the back burner and is FCV operating on hydrogen. Ford is also developing the pursuing methanol and direct-hydrogen systems more vigor- P2000 SUV concept, a vehicle that features a fuel cell
14 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE THE CALIFORNIA FUEL CELL PARTNERSHIP
The California Fuel Cell Partnership (CFCP) includes auto manufacturers DaimlerChrysler, Ford Motor Co., Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Volkswagen, General Motors and Toyota; energy providers BP, Shell, Texaco and Methanex (as an associate member); fuel cell companies Ballard Power Systems and International Fuel Cells; and governmental agencies CARB, California Energy Commission (CEC), South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), DOE and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Partnership will place nearly 70 fuel cell passenger cars and buses on the road between 2000 and 2003. In addition to testing the fuel cell vehicles, the Partnership will identify fuel infrastructure issues and prepare the California market for this new technology. CFCP will focus on the use of hydrogen and methanol in its fleet of fuel cell demonstration vehicles.
engine with a methanol reformer. In October 2000, Ford system, the Zafira now achieves full power nearly 12-times debuted the world s first production-prototype direct- faster in freezing conditions than its predecessor. Opel also hydrogenannounced that the Zafira was chosen to be the marathon fuel cell vehicle the Ford Focus FCV. The automaker plans pace vehicle at the 2000 Olympics in Sydney, Australia. to put up to 50 fuel cell vehicles on the road between 2000 In November 2000, General Motors displayed the and 2003. HydroGen1, its latest road-going hydrogen-powered fuel While Toyota remains fuel neutral, the company has cell vehicle. The HydroGen1 is a five-seat concept vehicle, showcased a prototype MFCV based on the popular RAV4 based on Opel s Zafira compact van. Its hydrogen-fueled SUV, with a range of 500 kilometers (310 miles). Toyota s fuel cell unit powers a 75-horsepower electric motor that fuel cell RAV4 employs a 25-kW fuel cell that works in attains speeds of nearly 90 miles per hour and a range of conjunction with a downsized electric vehicle battery pack. about 250 miles per tank of hydrogen. The batteries are constantly recharged from the fuel cell. GMC announced plans to begin high-volume produc- Regenerative braking provides additional electric power to tion of fuel cell vehicles before 2010, initially planning to charge the batteries. Toyota s design draws extra power use gaseous hydrogen in its fuel cell vehicles. To speed up from the batteries to supplement the fuel cell during accel- the innovation process, GMC has teamed up with Toyota eration. The batteries also enhance the vehicle by providing Motor Corporation and Giner, Inc., a research and develop- instant power, avoiding the short warm-up that prototype ment firm with extensive experience in developing direct fuel cell reformers require to reach maximum power methanol and other fuel cell technologies. output. Due to its high fuel economy, Toyota believes that Germany s Volkswagen has developed a MFCV in once in production, the fuel cost to the consumer will be partnership with Johnson Matthey (United Kingdom), half that of conventional gasoline vehicles, and it is likely Volvo (Sweden), and the Energy Research Foundation this estimated cost will decline even further with improved Netherlands ECN, supported by the European Union. In design and manufacturing experience. November 2000, Volkswagen showed its fuel cell vehicle, Through its German subsidiary, Opel, General Motors the Bora HyMotion, based on the popular Jetta. The Corp. (GMC) introduced a methanol fuel cell-powered car HyMotion runs on liquified hydrogen. in 1998, based on the Zafira. The car is a four-seater, with a Honda has introduced two fuel cell cars the FCX-V1 50-kW electric motor. GMC is focusing much of its fuel cell and FCX-V2. The V2 has a 60-kW PEM fuel cell and a research and development at Opel s Global Alternative methanol reformer, both built by Honda. The automaker Propulsion Center in Germany. In March of 2000, Opel plans to build 300 fuel cell-powered vehicles a year begin- unveiled the latest version of the Zafira, running on ning in 2003 for sale in Japan and the United States. hydrogen. Powered by its seventh-generation fuel cell Nissan is testing a fuel cell/battery hybrid vehicle first
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 15 TABLE 2 • PROJECTED GROWTH IN ANNUAL GLOBAL
shown in Japan in May 2000. The car, based on the Xterra These are hybrid buses, using batteries to provide surge SUV, features a PEM fuel cell using a methanol-reformer and power and as storage for electricity created by regenerative lithium-ion batteries. The vehicle is able to switch between braking. The use of methanol fuel gives them a range fuel cell power and battery power while in operation. comparable to diesel buses, and they can be refueled as Nissan and Suzuki have joined a government-sponsored easily and quickly. The buses are expected to have virtually project to develop DMFCs for vehicles that is expected to no emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx, an ozone precursor) result in a prototype vehicle by 2003. and particulate matter (PM or soot), less than one-tenth the Georgetown University of Washington, DC has been hydrocarbon emissions, and only 2 percent of the CO a leader in the demonstration and development of methanol emissions of the cleanest compressed natural gas (CNG) fuel cells for transit buses, supported by the U.S. Federal buses on the road. Transit Administration (FTA) and the Department of Energy It is projected that the total number of vehicles world- (DOE). In 1994 and 1995, Georgetown rolled out three 30- wide will increase from 600 million today to 1 billion foot buses that were the world s first fuel cell vehicles between the years 2015 and 2020. The introduction of large capable of operating on liquid fuels. In 1999, Georgetown numbers of low-emission, energy-efficient MFCVs is not unveiled a methanol-fueled, prototype 40-foot transit bus only needed, but well within reach. There have been using a 100-kW phosphoric acid fuel cell from International several attempts to estimate the future market penetration Fuel Cells. Early in 2000, XCELLSIS built a 100-kW PEM fuel of FCVs. The DOE has estimated that FCVs will account for cell, powered by a Ballard fuel cell, for another full-size 1.3 percent of the new car market in 2010, and 8.24 methanol-fueled bus. This is the largest liquid-fueled PEM percent in 2020. The Japanese Institute of Energy fuel cell built to date, using a low-temperature steam Economics estimates that the share of new car sales for reformer and a selective oxidizer (SelOx) to achieve accept- FCVs in Japan will increase rapidly from 0.1 percent in 2010 able levels of CO. to 33.5 percent in 2020.
16 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE For purposes of this penetration increases to report, we will assume that .33 percent or 197,765. in the first year of commer- By this time, the global cial sales (2004) 9,950 fleet of MFCVs MFCVs will be sold (see approaches one half Table 2), representing 0.02 million. In year 17 percent of global sales of (2020), market penetra- new cars (60,000,000 tion increases to 18.67 total). By 2010, market percent, or 11,204,268 million vehicles. At this time, the cumulative worldwide fleet of
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 17 WHAT ARE THE SAFETY AND HEALTH IMPACTS OF METHANOL FUEL USE?
“METHANOL IMPROVES THE PERFORMANCE
OF THE CARS BECAUSE OF ITS HIGH
OCTANE, BUT THAT’S NOT WHY WE USE IT. ethanol has been the fuel of choice for the
WE USE IT BECAUSE IT IS SAFER. IT Indianapolis 500 since the mid-1960s, not
GREATLY REDUCES THE RISK OF FIRE.” only because it is environmentally sound and achieves high performance, but because it is WILLIAM PHIL CASEY, TECHNICAL DIRECTOR OF THE INDY RACING LEAGUE Malso one of the safest fuels available. July 2000 Using methanol greatly reduces the risk of fire. In the United States, there are over 180,000 vehicle fires each year in which gasoline is the first material to ignite. A switch to methanol could reduce this to 18,000 vehicle fires, saving 720 lives, preventing nearly 3,900 serious injuries and eliminating property losses of millions of dollars a year (see Table 3). Pure methanol (M-100) is much harder to ignite than gasoline and burns at a much slower rate about 60 percent slower. Methanol also burns much cooler, releasing energy at one-fifth the rate of burning gasoline. Under bright daylight conditions methanol does burn with an invisible flame, however, fuel related fires typically combust some type of material from the vehicle that will impart color to the flame. Unlike gasoline fires, methanol fires can be extin- guished simply and quickly by dousing them with water. For these reasons, methanol is a much safer fuel to use in a vehicle. All motor fuels are poisonous and should be handled with care. Similar careful handling procedures used for gasoline and other fuels should be observed for methanol. There are three ways humans come in contact with fuels: by skin absorption, inhalation and ingestion. When in contact with skin, methanol will feel cool, and any affected areas should be washed thoroughly with soap and water. Since the EPA classifies gasoline vapors as a probable human carcinogen, long-term exposure to gasoline vapors is more hazardous than exposure to methanol vapors. Methanol, like gasoline or diesel fuels, should never be
18 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE ingested. Deaths have mental engineering firm TABLE 3 • FUEL-RELATED VEHICLE FIRES, DEATHS, INJURIES been reported from Malcolm Pirnie, which intake of as little as 13 ml. found that methanol is of gasoline (less than one less toxic to humans than ounce). More often the gasoline, and is neither untreated fatal range of mutagenic nor carcino- ingestion is 120-300 ml. genic. (4-10 ounces). Methanol Human bodies contain is slightly more toxic than methanol naturally, and it gasoline with a fatal dose is found in many parts of range of 25-90 ml. (0.8-3 our diet, including fresh ounces). fruit, vegetables and 0 0 0 According to key fermented foods and findings of a methanol Gasoline (FEMA and NHTSA Data) Methanol (EPA Projection) beverages. The body even hazard assessment by the makes methanol from Environ Corporation, Aspartame-sweetened diet there is no evidence to indicate, nor reason to believe, that beverages. In fact, studies suggest that more methanol is it would be carcinogenic. These findings were supported generated from drinking a can of diet soda than from by the 1999 study, Evaluation of the Fate and Transport of exposure to vapors from a half dozen fill-ups of a MFCV at a Methanol in the Environment, prepared by the environ- self-service pump. But make no mistake, methanol, like gasoline, can be toxic if ingested and should be handled with care.
THE HEALTH EFFECTS INSTITUTE
The Health Effects Institute (HEI), an independent, nonprofit corporation, provides research findings on the health effects of a variety of pollutants. To determine whether exposure to methanol vapors could have adverse health impacts, HEI conducted several studies, using primates and their infant offspring, pregnant and non-pregnant rodents and humans. Each study proved that methanol inhalation has no detectable effect on the respective subject. In the human study, researchers exposed 12 young male volunteers to either filtered air or methanol vapors (192 parts-per-million) for 75 minutes. This concentration of methanol is estimated to approach the highest concen- tration that individuals might experience from normal use of methanol-fueled vehicles under a worst-case scenario. The volunteers underwent 20 commonly used tests of sensory, behavioral and reasoning performance before, during and after each exposure. They found that methanol had no detectable effect on the subject’s performance for most tests. Performance was slightly impaired in two tests, but the effects observed were minor and within the range of test values for subjects exposed to air. HEI’s primate studies concluded that exposure to methanol posed no risk for reproductive or developmental effects.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 19 WHY IS METHANOL NOT THE SAME AS MTBE?
METHANOL IS UBIQUITOUS IN NATURE
SINCE IT IS PRODUCED BY
MICROORGANISMS RESPONSIBLE ethanol has been widely used as an industrial
FOR COMPLEX HYDROCARBON chemical since the nineteenth century.
BIODEGRADATION. Currently, methanol is used as feedstock for
IN CONTRAST, MTBE IS A XENOBIOTIC the production of commonly used organic Mcompounds including formaldehyde, acetic acid and MTBE. OR MAN-MADE COMPOUND.
AS A RESULT, METHANOL IS EASILY In addition, it is heavily used as a solvent in paint strippers,
AND QUICKLY DEGRADED IN THE plastics, plywoods and in automobile windshield washer
ENVIRONMENT BY A DIVERSE RANGE OF solutions. Since 1965, methanol has also been used as a fuel,
MICROORGANISMS UNDER MOST most commonly as M-85, a blend consisting of 85 percent
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS. methanol and 15 percent unleaded gasoline. Programs to demonstrate the feasibility of using M-85 as an alternative to conventional gasoline have successfully taken place over the last 20 years, most notably in California. In 1990, requirements to ensure that new underground storage tanks were compatible with either gasoline or methanol were established by Congress. Contrary to methanol s diverse applications over the decades, MTBE s use has been mostly limited to the fuel industry. MTBE was initially added to gasoline in low quanti- ties to replace lead as an octane enhancer in the late 1970s. In the United States, the addition of MTBE to gasoline signif- icantly increased following the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990, which mandated the use of reformu- lated and oxygenated gasoline in certain urban regions to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles. Since then, almost all of the MTBE produced has been used to oxygenate gasoline. Because methanol is used during the production of MTBE, there has been some concern expressed regarding a potential similarity in the behavior of both compounds in subsurface environments. In particular, there has been an interest in understanding whether the two different compounds can be expected to have similar impacts if
20 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE TABLE 4 • WATER SOLUBILITY OF released into groundwater and HYDROCARBON COMPOUNDS While the health effects of MTBE 2 drinking water supplies. Benzene — 18 are not yet well understood, those Toluene2 — 25 The fate and transport character- associated with methanol have been MTBE3 — 4,700 istics of methanol and MTBE in the Methanol4 — 791,400 well studied. Methanol s 8-hour environment, as with any chemical occupational Threshold Limit Value 1 Solubility (mg/L) at 20¡C compound, are a strong function of 2 From conventional gasoline containing 1 percent benzene and 5 (TLM) of 200 ppm (parts-per-million) percent toluene the compound s chemical and 3 From reformulated gasoline containing 11.1 percent MTBE is slightly lower than that of conven- 4 Methanol s solubility in water is 100 percent so its solubility is physical properties. Both methanol equal to the density of methanol. tional gasoline (TLM of 300 ppm). An and MTBE are highly soluble in water adult refueling with methanol at a relative to the aromatic (e.g., service station may be exposed to a benzene) and aliphatic (e.g., iso-pentane) components of maximum vapor concentration of 38 ppm for 4 minutes, gasoline (see Table 4). In addition, both compounds poorly corresponding to an oral intake of 3 mg of methanol. To put adsorb to subsurface soil particles. However, this is where this in perspective, drinking one can of diet soda containing the similarity in the behavior of these two compounds in Aspartame (10 percent of which is converted to methanol the environment ends. in the body) corresponds to an oral intake of 20 mg of In contrast to MTBE, which is a highly branched methanol. molecule with a tertiary carbon structure and a molecular MTBE s taste and odor threshold limits are extremely weight of 78 grams per mole, methanol has a simple low (<40 ppb or parts-per-billion) occasionally necessitating straight-chain structure and a molecular weight of 32 grams stringent clean-up levels during water treatment that are per mole. In addition, methanol is ubiquitous in nature based on consumer acceptance rather than potential health since it is produced by microorganisms responsible for effects. On the other hand, the odor detectability of complex hydrocarbon biodegradation. In contrast, MTBE is methanol is relatively high and has been shown to vary from a xenobiotic or man-made compound. As a result, methanol 100 to 6,000 ppm. is easily and quickly degraded in the environment by a It is interesting to note that methanol is used in cars, diverse range of microorganisms under most environmental even when they are not operated on methanol fuels. Almost conditions (i.e., in the presence and absence of oxygen), 400 million gallons of methanol are used annually in that use methanol as a source of carbon and energy. windshield washer fluid that may consist of up to 50 Furthermore, due to its high solubility in water, methanol percent methanol by volume. Methanol s use in windshield molecules are readily available to microorganisms, and a washer fluid is favorable due to its antifreeze properties, wide distribution of methanol-degraders has been and because it is quickly diluted during wet weather documented as occurring naturally in the environment. minimizing its environmental impact. While MTBE has been shown to degrade in laboratory It is also important to note that over 100 wastewater and field studies under controlled conditions, there are no treatment plants in the United States currently use methanol compelling indications to date that the biodegradation of as a carbon source to remove nitrate from water during the MTBE is occurring at significant rates in subsurface environ- anaerobic denitrification of sewage. Reducing nitrate levels ments. As a result, if MTBE is accidentally released into from wastewater treatment plant effluent helps protect subsurface environments, it can be expected to move at the sensitive aquifers. For example, the Blue Plains Wastewater speed of groundwater with little to no retardation. Treatment plant, which serves the Washington, DC Methanol, however, can be expected to dissolve quickly metropolitan area, injects roughly 14 million gallons of leading to its dilution in groundwater, followed by its rapid methanol each year to reduce nitrates and protect the sensi- biodegradation by subsurface microbial communities. tive Chesapeake Bay watershed.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 21 HOW WILL METHANOL FUEL CELLS REDUCE URBAN AIR POLLUTION?
“IF THEY WORK, METHANOL FUEL CELLS
COULD BE A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH IN
ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND CONSERVATION. ir pollution is associated with large metropolitan
THE BRAVE NEW TECHNOLOGY COULD areas where many vehicles, homes and indus-
DRASTICALLY CUT AIR POLLUTION FROM tries are found. In the United States, the
AUTO EMISSIONS AND OTHER SOURCES.” principal pollutants regulated by the CAA and Aits amendments are CO, NO , volatile organic compounds MICHAEL PARRISH, ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS NETWORK x December 30, 1999 (unburned hydrocarbons or VOCs), and PM. According to the EPA, over 113 million Americans live in areas not meeting National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The MFC will all but eliminate these pollutants from vehicles (see Tables 5 & 6). A substantial benefit to air quality and the public health may be anticipated as a result. As can be seen in Table 5 by moving away from combus- tion, methanol fuel cell cars will emit a minuscule amount of the criteria pollutants described here. Initial dynamometer emissions tests of NECAR 3 were extremely encouraging. Although the tests were conducted on a hot operating vehicle, and unfortunately too few for statistical extrapolation, they showed that the MFCV produced no NOx or CO emissions. Hydrocarbon emissions were 0.005 grams per mile, or one-half the Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (SULEV) limit set by the State of California. The MFCV is an inherently clean vehicle. Even the cleanest gasoline ICE vehicle will not be as clean as a MFCV. The gasoline vehicle depends on elaborate control technologies and computerized diagnostics to maintain its level of emissions control. Since the MFCV relies on an electric drivetrain, it is feasible that the MFCV will not be required by states to have regular emissions testing. In the absence of proper maintenance and sophisti- cated inspection or diagnostic procedures, the gasoline vehicle can enter a failure mode that may emit hundreds of times the legal limits of pollution. Over time, as the vehicle passes from one owner to another, it tends to be less well
22 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE TABLE 5• URBAN SMOG FORMING EMISSIONS
Source: Evaluation of Fuel Cell Reformer Emissions, Acurex - CARB/SCAQMD, 1999; www.methanex.com maintained, and its emissions increase. In contrast, the commissioned a study by Arthur D. Little titled Refinement of MFCV can pass from owner to owner and its pollution Selected Fuel Cycle Emission Analyses. The draft final report profile will remain very low: zero in some pollutant found that methanol emissions from a bulk terminal with tank categories, close to zero in others. capacity of 50,000 barrels (bbl) and associated evaporative Methanol has a much lower vapor pressure than gasoline emissions controls would emit 0.0063 g of methanol per with a Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) of 4.63 pounds-per-square- gallon of throughput. The report also concluded that NMOG inch (psi) as opposed to gasoline with an RVP of (non-methane organic gases) emissions associated with approximately 7-9 psi depending on exact composition. This methanol would be approximately 0.01 g/mile which is implies that methanol will exhibit lower evaporative roughly equivalent to CEC’s estimates of the NMOG emissions emissions when compared to gasoline. CARB recently associated with a battery electric vehicle.
TABLE 6 • STEADY STATE TRANSIT BUS EMISSIONS
FUEL POWER PLANT HC CO NOX PM
Diesel DD Series 50* 0.10 0.90 4.70 0.04 CNG DD Series 50 0.80 2.60 1.90 0.03 Diesel Cummins C8.3 0.20 0.50 4.90 0.06 CNG Cummins C8.3 0.10 1.00 2.60 0.01 Methanol 94 Fuji Fuel Cell 0.09 2.87 0.04 0.01 Methanol 98 IFC Fuel Cell** <0.01 <0.02 n/a n/a 96 Standards 1.30 15.50 5.00 0.05 98 Standards 1.30 15.50 4.00 0.05
All emissions values in g/bhp-hr. * with converter ** IFC test results
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 23 HOW WILL METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES ADDRESS THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT?
“WE ARE CONVINCED THAT METHANOL
IS A SUITABLE AND SAFE FUEL FOR THE
FUEL CELL VEHICLES OF TOMORROW.” lobal emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) gases such as CO and methane (CH ) blamed FINN KULAS, HEAD OF THE METHANOL DIVISION OF STATOIL 2 4 November 12, 1999 for an increase in average world temperatures have been under increasing scrutiny during Gthe last decade. In most industrialized nations, the trans- portation sector is a major source of GHG emissions. FCVs have the potential to substantially reduce GHGs in addition to virtually eliminating urban smog. The choice of fuel for the fuel cell can significantly impact the GHG benefit received. The study, Assessment of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases from Fuel Cell Vehicles, prepared by (S+T)2 Consultants for Methanex Corporation, found that decentralized steam reforming of natural gas to produce
hydrogen at a service station provided the greatest CO2 reductions (see Table 7). However, these plants are relatively large, expensive, may require skilled operators and may raise zoning concerns. And while there is an exten- sive natural gas distribution network in the United States, this is certainly not the case in many parts of the world. In countries without pipeline natural gas, methanol derived
from natural gas offers the greatest CO2 reductions. Of the liquid fuels considered for FCVs, methanol clearly provides the largest benefits for reducing GHG emissions, nearly twice that of low sulfur gasoline. The methanol industry is very competitive, with increasing pressure to build larger, more efficient manufac- turing plants. Existing methanol plants based on steam methanol reforming generally operate with an energy efficiency of nearly 65 percent. New plants using autothermal or combined reforming can achieve 70.3 percent (low heating value or LHV) to 72.1 percent (high heating value or HHV) efficiency. Future technology is expected to improve upon efficiency even further, with
24 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE expected energy efficiencies of 71.7 percent LHV and 73.5 mile, versus 461.9 grams per equivalent mile for a gasoline percent HHV. ICE car. Assuming that each car is driven 12,000 miles per
Looking ahead to 2020, we can envision a global fleet year, the annual CO2 emission reductions from the global of 40 million MFCVs. We expect the total well-to-wheel CO2 fleet of MFCVs would reach a staggering 104 million metric emissions from a MFCV to be 243.5 grams per equivalent tons.
TABLE 7 • WELL-TO-WHEEL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
600
Base Case Vehicle Mat l & AssemblyVehicle Operation Fuel Extr/Prod/Distr
500 -8.5% -13.8%
-22.55 -21.9% 400 -25.8%
-41.7% -44.5% 300
200 gm CO2 eq/mile 100
0 Fuel: Gasoline Fuel: CH2 Fuel: CH2 Fuel: LH2 Fuel: CH2 Fuel: Fuel: No Fuel: FTD Source: Oil Source: Source: POX/NG Source: NG Source: NG Methanol Sulfur GasolineSource: NG SMR/NG Source: NG Source: Oil Source: (S&T)2 Consultants Inc., 2000
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 25 HOW WILL METHANOL FUEL CELL USE ADDRESS WATER POLLUTION?
“OUR STUDY ON THE FATE AND TRANSPORT
OF METHANOL IN THE ENVIRONMENT
SHOWED THAT, RELATIVE TO GASOLINE AND he MFCV, in addition to lowering harmful
ITS CONSTITUENTS LIKE BENZENE, METHANOL emissions into the atmosphere, will also prove to
WILL LIKELY HAVE FAR FEWER ADVERSE be a major advancement toward improved protec-
IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT.” tion of water quality on land and in the ocean. TMethanol is intrinsically less damaging to the environ- DR. MICHAEL C. KAVANAUGH, P.E., VICE PRESIDENT OF MALCOLM PIRNIE January 29, 1999 ment. No one would argue that the accidental release of methanol into the environment would be a good thing, but it would cause much less damage than similar oil or gasoline spills. Methanol is easily biodegradable in aerobic and anaer- obic environments. Methanol is used in the final stage of municipal sewage treatment processes before the waste- water is discharged into sensitive oceans and rivers. This denitrification process prevents nitrates from building up in streams and rivers. Nutrient loading in lakes, streams, rivers and oceans can lead to excessive algae and plant growth that subsequently kill fish and place unnecessary pressure on aquatic and marine ecosystems. Currently, more than 100 sewage treatment plants in the United States use methanol for wastewater treatment. According to the study, Evaluation of the Fate and Transport of Methanol in the Environment, prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, researchers reviewed the chemical and physical properties of methanol and then examined the fate of methanol in the environment under several potential release scenarios, such as surface water spills or leaks from underground storage tanks. It concluded that a large methanol spill into surface water would have some immediate effects on the biota in the direct vicinity of the spill. However, in contrast to a crude oil spill, as methanol rapidly dissipates into the environment, it reaches low concentration levels where biodegradation will occur quickly. Methanol is significantly less toxic to marine life than crude oil or gasoline, and many of the effects of short-
26 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE term exposure are tempo- to occur under both TABLE 8• ENVIRONMENTAL HALF-LIVES rary and reversible. The ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIUM METHANOL BENZENE MTBE aerobic and anaerobic Office of Pollution subsurface conditions. Soil1 1–7 days 5–16 days 28–180 days Prevention and Toxics Air2 3–30 days 2–20 days 1–11 days Hazards from gasoline leaks (OPPT) indicated that Surface Water3 1–7 days 5–16 days 28–180 days are greater than those of methanol is essentially Groundwater4 1-7 days 10–730 days 56–359 days methanol, because gasoline non-toxic to the four 1 Based on unacclimated grab sample of aerobic/water suspension from groundwater aquifers. and many of its toxic 2 Based on photo-oxidation half-life. aquatic fish species that 3 Based on unacclimated aqueous aerobic biodegradation. constituents, such as 4 Based on unacclimated grab sample or aerobic/water suspension from groundwater aquifers. were tested. The study benzene, biodegrade more found that in the event of slowly and will persist a spill, methanol concen- longer in the environment. trations will be benign to surrounding organisms in most The use of double-walled containment tanks and leak detec- cases and will be likely to biodegrade easily under a wide tion monitors greatly reduce the likelihood of methanol spills. range of geochemical conditions. Table 8 compares the estimated half-lives of methanol, Under another scenario, if methanol were to leak from an benzene and MTBE in the environment and clearly shows the underground storage tank, rapid biodegradation is expected more rapid biodegradation of methanol in soil and water.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 27 WHERE WILL I BUY METHANOL FUEL?
“OUR PREFERRED FUEL IS NOW METHANOL.
IT IS EASIER TO TRANSPORT AND WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT INSTALLING THE INFRA- onsumers have come to expect near universal
STRUCTURE WITH ALL THE MAJOR FUEL availability of fuel for their automobiles. In the
SUPPLIERS.” United States, nearly $100 billion in undepreci- ated capital is invested in the infrastructure to KLAUS-DIETER VOEHRINGER, DAIMLERCHRYSLER Financial Times, September 20, 1999 Cproduce, refine, distribute and retail market motor fuels. Each year more than $10 billion is spent to maintain and upgrade this network of 200,000 retail gasoline stations and 30,000 diesel stations. Cars with methanol fuel cells would do little to change the regular routine of consumers at the filling station. A driver would simply stop at a pump and fill up with methanol rather than gasoline. The existing wholesale methanol distribution infra- structure is relatively smaller, but well established and capable of delivering product to markets worldwide. Methanol distribution to the transportation sector would involve utilizing the existing gasoline distribution system by adding methanol-fueling capacity to retail gasoline outlets. The global distribution system includes significant maritime movements on vessels as large as 45,000 tons, and Methanex, the world leader in methanol production and marketing, has a new 100,000 dead weight ton (dwt) vessel, the Millennium Explorer. For delivery to inland locations, an extensive barge, rail car, and tanker truck network already exists to feed most locations in the United States, Europe and Japan. A major expansion of the system would be required if methanol fuel demand increased significantly. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the state of California built a network of nearly 100 public and private methanol refueling stations to service the public, publicly-owned and private fleets. The private and state-owned fleets comprised nearly 15,000 methanol-powered alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs). Additional methanol pumps were placed at energy stations across the country and in Canada. Based on calcula-
28 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE tions performed in Methanol Refueling Station Costs, a stations in target areas would cost approximately $1.2 billion. study prepared by EA Engineering, a nationwide methanol Assuming that retailing stations are required to dispense fueling retail system could be installed at 10 percent of the methanol throughout the United States, Europe, Japan and gasoline stations in the United States for less than $1 billion. Canada, the cost to convert 10 percent of the stations This amounts to a fraction of the $13 billion spent by the oil approaches $1.4 billion, and the cost to convert 25 percent industry to introduce reformulated gasoline (RFG) at stations of the stations is roughly $4.7 billion. throughout the country, or the $1.4 billion spent each year The participation of the oil industry would help facili- to upgrade the retail gasoline network. tate the establishment of a methanol-fueling network. Converting an existing double-walled gasoline under- Although the costs of installing methanol storage and ground storage tank to methanol use, and installing new pumping facilities are relatively low, the costs for real piping and a dispenser is the lowest cost option for retail estate, buildings and developing brand name recognition station conversion. An existing gasoline or diesel tank can can be much higher. Today s drivers want the convenient be cleaned and a methanol dispensing system added for availability they enjoy with gasoline. In 1998, Ford slightly less than $20,000. The capital cost for adding announced a strategic alliance with ExxonMobil methanol capacity to an existing gasoline station by installing Corporation to develop cleaner fuel and engine systems, a new 10,000-gallon, double-walled, underground storage including technology for fuel reformers. DaimlerChrysler tank, piping and dispenser is about $62,400. Adding an entered into a similar alliance with Shell Oil to cooperate on aboveground storage tank, fuel cell and reformer TABLE 9 • INSTALLATION COST* TO INFRASTRUCTURE used by fleet operators and technology, and to REGION EXISTING STATIONS 25% OF STATIONS 50% OF STATIONS rural retail stations, costs evaluate Shell s catalytic California 11,700 59 146 roughly $54,500. New York 6,504 33 81 POX technology that trans- Fuel cell vehicle intro- Massachusetts 2,600 13 33 forms conventional fuel Germany 17,632 88 220 duction will most likely Japan 59,990 300 750 into hydrogen-rich gas. focus initially on California SUBTOTAL 98,426 $493 $1,230 DaimlerChrysler and Ford with its requirement for Canada 13,782 69 172 are working with oil Remaining U. S. 167,088 835 2,089 the sale of zero-emission Remaining Europe 100,212 501 1,253 companies including vehicles (ZEVs) by 2003 TOTAL 281,082 $1,405 $4,744 BP, ExxonMobil and (and possibly New York, * Assumes installation costs of $50,000 per station. Amounts in Millions Texaco to develop the and Massachusetts which filling-station infrastructure have or are adopting similar ZEV programs), as well as for FCVs. Germany and Japan. These highly populated areas are The DaimlerChrysler/Ford partnership is currently urging strong candidates because they tend to have higher levels of oil companies to consider installing liquid methanol pumps air pollution, and at the same time offer maximum scale and tanks in their service stations. In addition, oil compa- efficiencies for the first wave of a methanol-fueling nies, automakers and the methanol industry are infrastructure. More customers for each fuel pump means collaborating in the Methanol Specification Council, formed lower cost in the crucial early phases of MFCV introduction. in 1999 to develop worldwide specifications for methanol By simultaneously introducing their MFCVs in Germany and fuel for use in FCVs. Japan as well as in the United States, global automotive In September 2000, DaimlerChrylser, British Petroleum companies will achieve higher production runs that will (BP), BASF, Methanex Corporation, Statoil and XCELLSIS help lower costs. entered into a cooperative agreement to evaluate what As shown in Table 9, the cost of enabling 10 percent of would be needed to facilitate the introduction and commer- the stations in target areas to dispense methanol would be cialization of MFCVs. The goals are to establish a joint less than $500 million. Converting even 25 percent of the position after examining any health, safety, environmental
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 29 HOW MUCH WILL I PAY FOR METHANOL FUEL?
“THE DIFFICULTY HERE IS THAT FUEL CELLS
USE NOT HYDROCARBONS BUT HYDROGEN.
AND HYDROGEN, BEING AN EXPLOSIVE he future fuel cost of operating a MFCV cannot be
GAS WITH A RIDICULOUSLY LOW BOILING determined precisely, but a relative sense can be
POINT, IS HARD TO HANDLE ROUTINELY. inferred from past data. Historical price data can be
YET, IT IS FAIRLY EASY TO MAKE IT used to calculate what it would cost to operate a TMFCV, in comparison to a standard ICE vehicle getting 27.5 ‘ON THE FLY’ FROM METHANOL.
AND IT IS THIS CHEMICAL (WHICH IS A mpg using gasoline.
LIQUID AT ROOM TEMPERATURE) Since 1975, the average wholesale spot price for
THAT DRIVERS WILL EVENTUALLY methanol has been 46 cents-per-gallon on a non-inflation
PUT IN THEIR TANKS.” adjusted basis. The cost structure of the methanol industry has been decreasing in real terms due to economies of scale “FUEL CELLS HIT THE ROAD” The Economist, April 24, 1999 achieved through the construction of larger, more efficient plants and the distribution of methanol in much larger seagoing vessels. New technologies such as jumbo methanol plants on a scale of 10,000 tons-per-day (the equivalent of 1.2 billion gallons per year), are extremely efficient and capable of producing at a forecasted bulk methanol price of approximately 30 cents-per-gallon that includes full capital cost recovery and a reasonable return for investors. Table 10 compares methanol and gasoline pricing in the United States from 1975 to 2000. Methanol, like gasoline, has experienced pricing highs and lows, but it is clear from the data that on average, methanol is substantially cheaper per gallon than gasoline. To determine the potential pump price of methanol, assume the average cost to bring a gallon of methanol to the retail station includes the following: 10 cents for regional transportation and distribution, 4 cents for local distribution and 5 cents for the station owner, or an overall pre-tax cost of 19 cents. Then add 9.15 cents in federal tax, and 9 cents in state tax (for California). Based on the wholesale spot price of 30-45 cents-per-gallon for methanol, and the addition of other costs, the pump price may fall between 67-82 cents-per-gallon. While methanol
30 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE contains just one-half the TABLE 10 METHANOL AND GASOLINE PRICING will be between 77-94 energy of gasoline, because cents per gasoline-equiva- Crude Oil Prices Historic Methanol Wholesale Gasoline the fuel cell car has a fuel ($/bil) USG Spot Prices (cpg) Prices (cpg) lent-gallon. At this price, economy of 1.74-times methanol will be able to greater than a gasoline ICE, compete quite well with the actual cost to the gasoline, and provide a consumer to fuel a MFCV significant return on invest- ment to retailers converting pumps to methanol operation.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 31 HOW MUCH METHANOL WILL BE NEEDED TO SERVE THE MARKET?
“IT IS ESTIMATED THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT
EXCESS CAPACITY FROM EXISTING METHANOL
PLANTS AROUND THE WORLD TO SUPPORT A n 2000, worldwide methanol production capacity stands PRODUCTION RATE OF SEVERAL MILLION at 12.5 billion gallons (37.5 million tons), with a utiliza- METHANOL-BASED FUEL CELL VEHICLES tion rate of just under 80 percent. The industry generates ANNUALLY. PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT over $12 billion in annual economic activity, while LOOKS AS IF IT WOULD BE RELATIVELY Icreating over 100,000 direct and indirect jobs. Methanol INEXPENSIVE TO EXPAND PRODUCTION FOR and its derivatives are widely used in manufacturing METHANOL IN THE FUTURE.” products such as fiberboard used in home construction,
ROBERT K. WINTERS, BEAR STEARNS Spandex fibers used in clothing, numerous plastics, April 2000 windshield washer fluid and cleaner-burning gasoline. Typical plant sizes a decade ago were capable of producing 600,000 tons of methanol a year. Plants now coming on line can produce 1 million tons-per-year and planned jumbo plants may produce up to 3.5 billion tons-per-year within a decade. Methanol supply will not be limited, because the sources of methanol production are large, diverse, and in the long term, renewable. Given the estimates of fuel cell vehicle market penetra- tions from Table 2, several assumptions about methanol fuel demand can be made. Under initial penetration assump- tions, estimates reveal that by the year 2010, automakers will have introduced nearly 500,000 MFCVs. If each vehicle travels 12,000 miles annually, using 436 gallons of methanol (achieving 55 miles-per-gasoline-equivalent-gallon), overall demand would be 218 million gallons of methanol per annum, or less than 2 percent of current world capacity. By 2020, the estimated global fleet of fuel cell vehicles jumps to 40 million vehicles, consuming 17.4 billion gallons of methanol exceeding current world capacity and requiring significant capital investment in new methanol production. Because large-scale methanol plants can be built within 24 to 30 months, adding the necessary capacity to meet this new demand in the 20-year time horizon can be accomplished easily.
32 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE Meeting the demand for the use of methanol as a trans- Companies such as Methanex and Synetix have worked portation fuel will support plants using the most advanced together closely to develop a new syngas generation technologies plants with greater than 70 percent energy technology for methanol production. The process is aimed efficiency and capable of capturing 10 percent more of the at large-scale syngas production, and while it offers benefits energy in methane than predecessor plants just 10 years for plant sizes of 1 million tons of methanol per year, the older. Adding new production capacity will push the scalability of the equipment delivers significant advantages industry standard toward this new technology norm. Large over competing technologies at plant scales of 2 million new mega-methanol plants generating roughly 10,000 tons- tons-per-year or larger. The Foster Wheeler Corporation has per-day of methanol (enough to power about 2.6 million developed the Starchem methanol production process. MFCVs annually) will benefit from economies of scale and This approach produces low purity methanol on a very are expected to cost less than $1 billion. Energy efficiency large scale at low cost from remote and stranded gas improvements will lower production costs still further. resources, through integration of enriched air production, catalytic partial oxidation, methanol synthesis and purge-gas hydrogen recovery.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 33 IS THERE ENOUGHBEYOND NATURAL THE GAS? INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE
THERE ARE VAST QUANTITIES OF INCONVE-
NIENTLY LOCATED NATURAL GAS WORLDWIDE
THAT MAKE DISTRIBUTION TO LOCAL ENERGY ccording to the EIA, global gas reserves have
MARKETS UNECONOMICAL. HOWEVER, BY more than doubled over the past 20 years,
CONVERTING THE NATURAL GAS TO outpacing the 62 percent growth in oil
METHANOL, IT BECOMES POSSIBLE TO ACCESS reserves. Oil and Gas Journal estimates Aproven world gas reserves as of January 1, 2000, at 5,146 THESE LARGE RESERVES FOR USE IN THE
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR. trillion cubic feet. Under current reserve-to-production ratios, proven natural gas reserves worldwide should last for 63.4 years, compared with 41 years for oil. However, demand is expected to increase and new gas fields are being discovered regularly. This makes prediction of recoverable reserves a moving target. Domestic natural gas production in the lower 48 states from onshore sources is expected to continue increasing through 2020. Production from unconventional sources and offshore wells in the Gulf of Mexico also will contribute to increased natural gas supplies. In addition, natural gas imports from Canada are expected to increase. At the same time, natural gas consumption will expand considerably. In 1998, natural gas consumption in the United States was 21.4 trillion cubic feet. By 2020, this figure will increase to between 29.5 and 32.7 trillion cubic feet. Growth is seen in every sector, led by rising demand for electricity genera- tion. In 2020, 40 million fuel cell vehicles operating on methanol derived from natural gas would create an annual demand of nearly 17.4 billion gallons of methanol or natural gas demand of 1.53 TCF (about one percent of antic- ipated world annual natural gas consumption of 167 TCF). There are vast quantities of inconveniently located natural gas worldwide that make distribution to local energy markets uneconomical. However, by converting the natural gas to methanol, it becomes possible to access these large reserves for use in the transportation sector. In the
34 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE Western Hemisphere, the world. Supplying methanol Chile, Venezuela and to a developing fuel cell market Trinidad and Tobago are will be a logical next step. perfect examples of Existing reserves are countries with large gas clearly plentiful and additional reserves and limited local significant natural gas finds markets. These countries are likely. However, in the have capitalized on following sections we will methanol production review other potential technology and are feedstocks for methanol shipping product around production that add to the already plentiful supply of raw materials.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 35 WILL METHANOL BE MADE FROM FLARED NATURAL GAS?
“MUCH OF THE WORLD’S ENDOWMENT OF
IDENTIFIED, RECOVERABLE NATURAL GAS
RESOURCES LIES IN REMOTE LOCATIONS OR oth in the United States and around the world,
IN SMALLER ACCUMULATIONS THAT MAKE great quantities of natural gas cannot be economi-
TYPICAL APPROACHES FOR PROJECT DEVELOP- cally recovered. According to the EIA, 3,600 billion
MENT, SUCH AS DELIVERY VIA PIPELINE OR cubic-feet of natural gas is flared and vented each Byear worldwide. Of critical concern, natural gas is a more LNG TANKER, UNECONOMICAL.” potent GHG than CO . One ton of natural gas emissions is ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION 2 International Energy Outlook 2000, March 2000 equivalent to 21 tons of CO2 emissions. Offshore natural gas offers a tremendous opportunity for methanol production because much of it cannot be economically connected to pipelines. If only 10 percent of flared gas was made avail- able for the methanol fuel market, it would be enough to power 9.5 million FCVs. More offshore natural gas will be discovered, and floating methanol production plants will provide a means of economically recovering this resource. Ocean-based facili- ties for producing methanol methanol floating production, storage and offloading systems (MFPSOs) are under development. One of the major developers of this production system is Kvaerner Process Technology, which by 2001 should begin to license the technology. Synetix developed their LCM methanol production technology in the early 1990s specifically for offshore appli- cations of MFPSOs. The first 54,000 ton-per-year development plant for capturing flared and vented natural gas began operating in Australia in 1994. The plant was built by BHP on land to test the novel concepts incorporated into the technology prior to Synetix taking it offshore. The principal features necessary for remote offshore operation include pressurized compact reforming technology; reduced demand for process water; steam venting and effluent processing; structured packing distillation; and full automa- tion. During this research period, the plant also has been a commercial operation, producing about 164 tonnes of chemical grade methanol daily.
36 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE FIGURE 3 • METHANOL FLOATING PRODUCTION, STORAGE AND OFFLOADING SYSTEM (MFPSO)
Statoil operates one of the world s largest methanol Production Co. (Ampco), will produce 2,500 metric tons of plants in Tjeldbergodden, Norway, producing 830,000 tons methanol each day from natural gas. It will use 100 million annually. The plant uses gas from the Heidrun oil and gas field cubic-feet a day of natural gas currently flared from oil fields in the Norwegian Sea, making it possible to recover oil in Equatorial Guinea s Alba production area. without flaring the natural gas. The world s large integrated energy companies have Worldwide, 11 trillion cubic-feet of natural gas released lately placed a high priority on identifying strategies to during petroleum drilling are pumped back underground. If monetize remote natural gas reserves by converting the gas this methane could be captured for methanol production, it to transportable liquid products such as liquefied natural alone would power over 250 million FCVs annually. gas (LNG), Fischer Tropsch (FT) liquids or methanol. While Capturing gas prior to flaring has other benefits. It LNG plant costs have dropped significantly in recent years, prevents the simple burning of a useful resource and the overall investments, including the supply chain, are still on resulting pollution. It captures the potential energy of this the order of $2 billion. While LNG plants are well suited for fossil fuel for other useful market applications, such as fuel exploiting large natural gas fields near power markets cells. The commercialization of methanol fuel cells could (where LNG can be burned to produce electricity), provide a boon to American oil and natural gas well opera- methanol can compete at larger distances and would be the tors, create additional jobs and foster incentives for use of natural choice for smaller field monetisation. methanol in nations such as Nigeria, where enough natural A 5,000 tons-per-day improved methanol plant gas is flared each year to meet the country s commercial produces the equivalent of 18,500 barrels of FT liquids, at a energy needs. The U.S. Overseas Private Investment capital cost of $21,600 per daily barrel of capacity. For FT Corporation (OPIC) has approved a $273 million loan to plants producing 10,000 barrels a day, the capital cost would underwrite the construction of a methanol plant in be the equivalent of $40,000 per daily barrel of capacity. Equatorial Guinea. The plant, operated by Atlantic Methanol Conventional mega-scale methanol plants can produce the cheapest transportable liquid fuel from remote gas..
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 37 WILL RENEWABLE FEEDSTOCKS BE USED FOR METHANOL PRODUCTION?
“METHANOL, OR ‘METHANOLIZED’
HYDROGEN, IS AN IDEAL LIQUID STORAGE
MEDIUM FOR HYDROGEN... METHANOL IS ost of the world s methanol is made by
SIMILAR TO HYDROGEN IN THAT PETROLEUM converting natural gas into an alcohol. But in
IS NOT NEEDED TO PRODUCE IT. IT CAN, IN the interest of reducing the United States
PRINCIPLE, BE PRODUCED FROM ANY CARBON dependence on foreign petroleum imports Mand reducing the U.S. trade deficit, methanol can be SOURCE.” produced from domestic resources such as wood, municipal DAIMLERCHRYSLER PRESS RELEASE November 2000 solid waste (MSW), agricultural feedstocks and sewage. All of these options are extremely attractive and feasible. The cultivation of dedicated wood biomass crops for methanol production may prove to be economical in the future. Production of methanol from biomass may begin where the cost of producing the fuel is offset by other benefits. MSW disposal and sewage treatment both meet the criteria. Methane released from MSW landfills and sewage processing plants accounts for nearly 11 percent of all natural gas released by the United States into the atmos- phere. Currently, the majority of the nations 4,800 landfills vent natural gas to the air. Since methane is a more potent
GHG than CO2, this is an intolerable situation. Landfills can be designed at the outset or even retrofitted to capture natural gas from the decomposing MSW, reducing this contribution to global warming. Currently, companies have tapped 140 U.S. landfills and are considering collecting natural gas at another 750, according to the EPA s Landfill Methane Outreach Program. In another process, gasifica- tion of MSW can be used to produce a high-quality syngas that is the basic building block for methanol production. Methanol can also be made by gasifying dried sewage sludge. Such a facility is already being operated in Berlin by the SVZ subsidiary (Sekundarrohstoff-Verwertungszentrum) of Berliner Wasser Betriebe, Germany s largest water supply and sewage disposal company, where sewage sludge is blended with brown coal for methanol production. The
38 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE facility produces up to 75 megawatts of electricity, and has a Methanol can be thought of as an ideal way to transport methanol production capacity of over 33 million gallons-per- hydrogen to the fuel cell without suffering the economic year. The facility is an important demonstration of the and safety disadvantages of handling a volatile pressurized technical feasibility of methanol production as a commer- gas. Methanol can be produced from the same natural gas cially viable by-product of wastewater treatment. resources from which hydrogen is produced today. In fact, Biomass processing tests will include local energy the first step in producing methanol is to make hydrogen. crops, municipal wastes, sewage sludge, landfill gas and However, when large quantities of renewable hydrogen waste wood. The University of California at Riverside s become practical to produce for the transportation market, College of Engineering-Center for Environmental Research it is unlikely that feedstock sources will be close to large and Technology (CE-CERT), has constructed the world s metropolitan centers holding the highest demand. Finding first pilot-scale facility demonstrating the Hynol Process. a practical way to transport hydrogen through the existing Hynol is a method for converting biomass into a synthesis liquid distribution system will greatly speed up its commer- gas, which can be processed further into methanol. CE- cial acceptance. Developing MFCVs will help accomplish CERT succeeded in operating the facility and gasifying this important goal because methanol can be made from biomass (wood chips) in December 1999 and January 2000, any source of renewable hydrogen by simply extracting and will continue to develop and operate this facility CO2 from the atmosphere and reacting it with hydrogen. throughout 2000 and beyond. Today, many methanol plants use their excess hydrogen by
consuming waste CO2 from other sources.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 39 ARE THERE OTHER POTENTIAL METHANOL FEEDSTOCK SOURCES?
AN EVOLVING PICTURE SHOWS THAT WITH A
LITTLE INGENUITY, AND EXAMINING ALL
POTENTIAL RESOURCES, THERE ARE atural gas is so abundant that it is likely to be
THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF FEEDSTOCKS FOR an attractive methanol feedstock for decades.
THE PRODUCTION OF METHANOL. But for those who worry about the depletion of this resource, there are many other sources Nof methane on the planet. One of them, coalbed methane, is already in commercial production. Another, methane hydrate, is the subject of intense scientific interest but is developmentally further off. An evolving picture shows that with a little ingenuity, and examining all potential resources, there are thousands of years of feedstocks for the production of methanol. Table 11 shows the number of years that various methanol feedstocks could potentially power 1 billion passenger vehicles. It does not take into account other uses of natural gas, but the overall picture is quite clear: this is an abundant resource. The following describes additional sources for the production of natural gas:
◗ Coalbed methane is natural gas that escapes from coal. It is vented naturally from the earth s crust, but also escapes into the atmosphere as a result of mining activity. Roughly 10 percent of anthropogenic methane in the atmosphere is due to coal mining. Harnessing coalbed methane for methanol fuel will help reduce coal mining-related emissions and also reduce the need to extract petroleum. Worldwide, total recoverable coalbed methane reserves are estimated at between 3,000 to 12,000 trillion cubic-feet. Used exclusively to make methanol, this would produce enough fuel to power 1 billion passenger vehicles for 75 to 300 years. Coalbed methane is a large resource in the United States and is currently in commercial production.
◗ Methane hydrate is another abundant source of natural gas, although currently not produced. Most of it is
40 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE offshore. It is a vast resource trillion cubic-feet would fuel TABLE 11 • WORLD METHANOL FEEDSTOCKS that defies easy quantification. CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL a methanol fuel cell fleet of 1 IN NUMBER OF YEARS OF FUEL FOR 1 BILLION VEHICLES World reserves of natural gas billion vehicles for 2,500 frozen in methane hydrate have years. These reserves answer been estimated at 100,000 to 5 the question of where million trillion cubic-feet, natural gas can be found in although one analysis calcu- the future should known and lated as much as 270 million conventional reserves, many trillion cubic-feet. The lower decades from now, face boundary estimate of 100,000 depletion.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 41 WHAT ARE THE STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS OF A WORLD METHANOL MARKET?
“ENERGY-EFFICIENT CARS WILL DRAMATICALLY
REDUCE OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL. he global reliance on oil as a motor vehicle fuel RIGHT NOW, MILLIONS OF AMERICANS ARE brings energy security risks that can have serious PAYING HIGHER GAS PRICES.” economic implications. The United States continues AL GORE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES March 31, 2000 to spend $60 billion each year on oil imports and Tanother $30 billion per year to protect its interests in the Persian Gulf. Since the oil price shocks of the 1970s, the U.S. reliance on foreign oil has actually increased from 38 percent in 1973 to 56 percent today. The U.S. EIA estimated that foreign oil imports will account for 73 percent of total domestic energy consumption by 2020, at a cost of nearly $95 billion. The early stages of fuel cell introduction will begin to shift world energy dependency away from oil and toward natural gas. The motivation of fuel markets should spur heightened interest to acquire nonconventional methanol feedstocks from the technologies discussed in the preceding sections. The benefits of these applications may be summarized as follows: Better dispersion of energy resources. While the gasoline-powered automobile will be with us for decades, the rise of fuel cell vehicles will have significant worldwide energy implications. Energy-importing countries will benefit from increased competition to supply a wider variety of transportation fuels. According to the EIA, while the Middle East holds 65 percent of global oil reserves, this volatile region accounts for only 34 percent of natural gas reserves. Less dependency on energy. Since FCVs are more efficient, less energy will be required by the transportation sector. Stable energy pricing. Price-regulating entities, such as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), will find it increasingly difficult to control the price of crude oil as the number of energy producers increases and no single fuel is allowed to dominate and dictate energy supply.
42 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE FIGURE 4 • WORLD METHANOL TRADE FLOW (1,000 METRIC TONS)
Fewer strategic crises. As energy production and Greater capacity for domestic self-reliance. The diversification increases, the probability decreases that tight development of renewable methanol feedstocks will offer markets will turn a local crisis in one country into an inter- many countries far more opportunities for self-reliance than national energy shortage. can be discerned from current maps of the geographic distribution of natural gas resources.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 43 AREN’T GASOLINE FUEL CELLS AND GASOLINE/BATTERY HYBRIDS BETTER?
“THERE IS NO REASON TO CRAM
YESTERDAY’S FUEL INTO TOMORROW’S
TECHNOLOGY. THE EXCITEMENT ABOUT FUEL FCVs are one of the great environmental
CELLS LIES IN THEIR ABILITY TO PROVIDE A bargains in history. For less than $2 per
ZERO-EMISSIONS FUTURE; BURDENING THEM person, a state or nation the size of
WITH GASOLINE’S POLLUTION UNDERMINES California, with 30 million people, could Mput methanol-fueling pumps into 10 percent of gasoline THIS PROMISE. AND HYDROGEN AND
METHANOL FUEL CELLS ARE CLOSER TO stations. From there, further development of the fuel distri-
COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION THAN bution system would cost even less. The principal obstacle
GASOLINE ONES. FUEL CELLS THAT to fuel cell vehicle deployment is establishing this initial
RUN ON CLEAN FUELS PUT US IN THE refueling infrastructure.
FAST LANE TO ENDING SMOGGY SKIES While this distribution hurdle should be manageable, it
AND OIL DEPENDENCE. WHY TAKE has been assumed that vehicles should be designed based
A DETOUR THROUGH GASOLINE?” on existing petroleum products such as gasoline and diesel. The two leading developments in this area are the gasoline JASON MARK, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS August 20, 2000 FCV and the gasoline/diesel-battery hybrid vehicle. The gasoline FCV is a decade behind other technolo- gies in terms of development and several years behind efforts to commercialize steam-reformed MFCVs. Today s gasoline has several components that make it more difficult to reform into a hydrogen stream. Aromatic and sulfur levels make reforming gasoline a daunting engineering challenge. Researchers have been developing technology for the POX of gasoline providing a multi-fuel capability, able to run on methanol, ethanol, gasoline or natural gas. At this time, there are no FCVs operating on gasoline, although NUVERA has announced plans to ship multi-fuel processors to several automakers for on-board vehicle tests. It is likely that a specially designed fuel from the refinery will be preferred for use in a gasoline FCV. This means that additional infrastructure costs would have to be incurred to accommodate this designer gasoline. If gasoline were to be used, sulfur levels would need to be reduced to much lower levels, and this would have associated refinery upgrade costs. The EPA has been
44 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE pushing the oil industry to reduce the sulfur content of a development born out of the limitations of battery gasoline from an average of 300 ppm down to 40 ppm or technology. Battery-powered electric vehicles are heavy, less. Estimates on the cost to produce this cleaner gasoline due to the weight of the battery pack, and have severe range from two to nine cents-per-gallon more at the pump. range limitations. Even the most advanced batteries have a The EPA s proposal to reduce sulfur in gasoline would range of about 100 miles in real world conditions, much less increase the cost of making gasoline by more than $7 billion than what consumers demand from a vehicle. a year, much more than the cost of converting the infra- On the hybrid vehicle, a small gasoline or diesel engine structure to accommodate methanol. For FCVs, a is provided to give extra range. There are a variety of gasoline-like fuel would require a sulfur content close to designs, but they all have the common feature of allowing a zero or vehicles would need an onboard sulfur extraction battery pack to be recharged during operation. Moreover, technology. Currently, no such fuel exists. they allow the gasoline engine to be optimized to control Even if gasoline FCV technology is developed, there are emissions to very low levels. For example, Toyota s hybrid still a number of reasons why methanol should be the fuel battery-gasoline vehicle will reduce emissions of NOx and of choice for fuel cells: VOCs significantly. Mileage per gallon may double if vehicle ◗ Gasoline reforming using POX requires much higher weight penalties are not too high, resulting in CO2 temperatures than methanol steam reforming: 800…C vs. emissions reductions of up to 50 percent. 250—300…C. MFCVs should achieve even lower levels of emissions ◗ Gasoline POX technology requires greater CO clean- for criteria pollutants, especially in the longer term when up (which is required for efficient performance of the fuel the DMFC is likely to take the very low pollution levels of cell) that adds greater weight, complexity and cost. the steam reformer fuel cell to zero in most emission ◗ Gasoline is not practical to use in a direct PEM fuel categories. cell, locking the industry into continual use of reformers. All in all, a $2 per capita one-time cost in developed Reformed methanol will lead the way to DMFC vehicles. countries for methanol fueled infrastructure development ◗ Gasoline reformer development because of its seems a sensible investment when compared to these alter- complexity could delay the commercialization of FCVs. natives. It seems unreasonable to advocate continued ◗ Gasoline reformer-based FCVs do not break the world reliance on petroleum products that are likely to cost the dependence on crude oil. consumer more in annual fuel costs (based on historical Another technological development has created the pricing) and have higher environmental impacts. The wisest hybrid vehicle. The gasoline/diesel-battery hybrid vehicle is investment for the public, considering the environment, energy security and consumer satisfaction, is the MFCV.
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 45 HOW DO WE ENCOURAGE THE INTRODUCTION OF MFCVs?
“WHILE OUR NATION HAS MADE IMPORTANT
TECHNOLOGICAL STRIDES TOWARD THE USE
OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS, THREE PRINCIPAL stablish or extend incentives for the purchase
MARKET BARRIERS REMAIN... ONE, THE and operation of FCVs and installation of
INCREMENTAL COST OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL alternative fuel infrastructure. Legislation has
VEHICLES; TWO, THE COST OF ALTERNATIVE been introduced in the U.S. Congress to provide a E25¢ per gasoline-equivalent gallon tax credit for the use of FUEL; AND, THREE, THE LACK OF REFUELING
STATIONS IN OUR NATION. OUR BILL TAKES methanol and other natural gas-based fuels. In addition, the
ON THIS THREE-PART PROBLEM WITH A legislation would extend and enhance existing tax credits
THREE-PRONGED ATTACK USING INCENTIVES for consumers purchasing electric vehicles including
AND NO FEDERAL MANDATES. USING TAX those powered by fuel cells that currently are set to
INCENTIVES, OUR LEGISLATION PROMOTES expire in 2004. The bill provides tax credits of between
THE PURCHASING OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL $4,250 for light-duty vehicles and $42,500 for heavy-duty
VEHICLES, PROMOTES THE USE OF ALTERNA- vehicles and buses until 2008. The incentive is increased to $6,373 for light-duty vehicles with a range of at least 100 TIVE FUELS, AND PROMOTES THE BUILDING miles. Finally, the legislation extends until 2007 the current OF AN INFRASTRUCTURE OF ALTERNATIVE law providing a $100,000 deduction for the cost of clean-fuel FUELING STATIONS THROUGHOUT THE vehicle refueling property. This legislation provides short- NATION.” term SENATOR ORRIN HATCH (R-UTAH) Capitol Hill, May 18, 2000 incentives that will be critical in helping to build the market for FCVs so that economies of scale can be achieved to reduce vehicles costs, and in encouraging the retail fueling industry to add methanol pumps.
Use Corporate Average Fuel Economy Credits. The Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988 established a CAFE program for vehicles fueled with alcohol or natural gas. To qualify for this credit, vehicles must meet requirements for: energy efficiency (a dedicated MFCV would certainly qualify); driving range (a minimum of 200 miles); and capability of starting and operating exclusively on the alter- native fuel. For dedicated alternative fuel vehicles, the fuel economy calculated for CAFE purposes is deemed to be 15 percent by volume. For example, a dedicated MFCV with a measured fuel economy of 55 miles-per-gasoline-equivalent- gallon, or 27.5 miles-per-gallon of methanol would receive a
46 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE TABLE 12 • EXAMPLES OF PARTIAL AND FULL ZEV ALLOWANCE VEHICLES AND ZEVs
VEHICLE TYPE* PRIMARY ENERGY SOURCE SECONDARY ENERGY SOURCE ZERO EMISSION RANGE (MILES) TOTAL ZEV ALLOWANCE
Gasoline ICE Gasoline N/A 0 0.2 Gasoline ICE/HEV Gasoline Electricity 0 0.3 CNG ICE CNG N/A 0 0.4 Gasoline ICE HEV, 20 mile ZE range Grid Electricity Gasoline 20 0.7 Methanol Reformer, FCV FC Methanol Electricity 0 0.7 Gasoline ICE HEV, 40 mile ZE range Grid Electricity Gasoline 40 0.8 Direct Methanol FCV, FC Methanol Electricity Any ZEV Battery EV Grid Electricity Any ZEV Stored Hydrogen FCV Hydrogen Any ZEV
rating of 27.5/0.15 or 183 miles per gallon. This is a signifi- makers may use partial ZEV credit vehicles to meet up to 60 cant benefit to automakers, who are currently building percent of their ZEV requirements. DMFC vehicles get the hundreds of thousands of ethanol-flexible fuel vehicles full ZEV credit and auto manufacturers will be able to apply simply to gain a CAFE credit that is a small fraction of that that credit toward the 4 percent pure ZEV requirement. available for dedicated MFCVs. Partial ZEV credits for gasoline-fueled vehicles Develop specifications for methanol fuel for FCVs. In should be sunsetted after 2005. CARB should limit the 1999, the Methanol Specification Council was formed to ability of gasoline-fueled vehicles to qualify for partial ZEV develop specifications for methanol fuel. The Council credits. Gasoline FCVs, or even hybrid vehicles, are not Working Group includes representatives of the oil, automo- inherently clean, and will result in higher levels of emissions tive and methanol industries. The Working Group s current than those from MFCVs. Further, the use of gasoline in focus is to prepare a comparative risk assessment of the use advanced technology vehicles will merely perpetuate our of methanol in FCVs and the use of gasoline in ICEs to nation’s dependence on imported oil. By establishing a provide technical support for the Council in developing sunset provision removing the ability of gasoline-fueled safe and acceptable methanol fuel specifications. vehicles to qualify for partial ZEV credits after 2005, California can demonstrate its preference for inherently Provide credit for MFCVs in regulatory policies clean vehicles using alternative fuels. encouraging the use of electric vehicles. The State of
California requires that 10 percent of the vehicles sold in Establish a mechanism to monetize the value of CO2 Model Year 2003 must be ZEVs. Massachusetts has also emission reductions. Successful emission trading systems adopted this program, and New York is proposing to do so as have been established to buy and sell emission reductions well. ZEVs have been assumed to be battery-powered electric achieved by stationary facilities for pollutants such as vehicles, however, the performance limitations of battery NOx(ranging from about $1,000 to $2,000 per ton) and electric vehicles (EVs) do not make them attractive to many VOCs (ranging from about $3,000 to $4,000 per ton). This consumers. The emissions from methanol steam reformer market-based approach provides industry with an economic FCVs are a fraction of those required for ICEs to qualify as incentive to reduce emissions beyond a statutory require- ultra-low emission vehicles or super ultra-low emission ment. The Kyoto Protocol called for the establishment of an vehicles ULEVs and SULEVs, respectively. Further, MFCVs emissions trading mechanism for CO2. Given the substantial will come close to or meet the emissions levels attributed to reductions of CO2 expected from MFCVs, including a the electric generating stations providing power to recharge mechanism for the trading of emissions from these mobile battery electric ZEVs. As a result, MFCVs qualify for the sources would provide significant monetary incentives for highest level of partial ZEV credits (see Table 12). Auto- automakers and consumers. Further, since MFCVs will
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 47 provide significant reductions in criteria pollutants (such as aged. Also, incentives such as the designation of preferen- NOx and VOCs), extending current emissions trading tial parking for operators of MFCVs in public facilities, systems to allow for participation from mobile sources also including ride-and-drive lots and transit facilities, would be would be advantageous. welcomed by consumers.
Encourage the development of strategic alliances. A Elimination of discriminatory fuel taxation. Fuels number of strategic alliances already have been formed to should be taxed on their energy content, not by volume. support the introduction of fuel cell and AFVs. Methanex is Currently taxation policies in many jurisdictions discrimi- working with Ballard, Ford is working with ExxonMobil, nate against alternative fuels by taxing clean fuels with and General Motors is partnering with BP, as well as Giner, relatively lower energy content on a simple volume basis, Inc. Broad-based strategic partnerships that involve the which encourages the use of gasoline. Many state govern- automotive, methanol, natural gas, and oil industries, along ments penalize methanol fuel by taxing it as if it were with government should be encouraged. These strategic gasoline. California is truly a fuel neutral state, with very partnerships can help overcome many of the initial hurdles little differential in taxation on an energy-equivalent basis. to the introduction of MFCVs, particularly the establishment South Dakota policy favors the development of an alcohol of a retail-fueling infrastructure. market.
Encourage the use of aggressive marketing Encourage the use of CMAQ funds for methanol campaigns for FCVs. Automakers have come to realize the fueling station construction. Funding levels for the federal significant consumer enthusiasm for clean, advanced Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement technology vehicles. Ford, Toyota and Honda have recently Program exceed $1 billion per year. States and municipalities launched significant advertising campaigns for hybrid should be encouraged to use this funding to help install vehicles that are being marketed for their environmental and methanol-fueling stations. The installation of fueling facilities energy efficiency benefits. The market introduction of serving government fleets is a logical first step. MFCVs will create even broader opportunities by educating Increase funding for research in DMFC technologies. consumers to the benefits and availability of this technology. The DMFC holds the greatest promise of reducing size, Provide additional incentives for FCV consumers. weight, cost, emissions and improving energy efficiency for States have the authority to allow single-occupant drivers of a broad array of applications. Federal funding for DMFC MFCVs and other AFVs to use high-occupancy vehicle development has been minimal and fragmented. The efforts (HOV) lanes. The adoption of these rules (now in place in of national laboratory, university, and private researchers Arizona, California, Georgia and Virginia) should be encour- should be directed to accelerating the pace of development of this important technology.
48 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE Notes
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 49 BIBLIOGRAPHY
This report summarizes information gathered from Abbott, Jim (1997). "Floating Methanol Production Offshore: The Technology Challenges and the a wide variety of sources: interviews with, and Opportunities," March 18-20, 1997, World Petrochemical critical review comments from industry and Conference, Houston, TX. government officials; academic journals; academic and industrial conference papers; news articles in Agbim, Arinze (1999). "The Availability of Remote and major print media sources; the business press; Stranded Natural Gas Feedstock for the future Production of government publications; industry reports and Methanol", 1999 World Methanol Conference, San Diego, news releases; and a variety of Internet materials CA. Washington, DC: The World Bank Group. made available by government, industry, environ- Alson, Jeffrey (1990). "The Methanol Debate: Clearing the mental organizations, and other entities. The Air," in Methanol as an Alternative Fuel Choice: An following citations are an extensive, but not Assessment, ed. Wilfrid L. Kohl, Washington, DC: John exhaustive, list of resources used in compiling this Hopkins University, pp. 393-410. report. Internet web sites are included. American Methanol Institute (1997). "Direct Methanol Special Note on Web Sites: Many Universal Fuel Cell Debuts at EVS 14," Dec. 13 news release, Resource Locators (URLs) or web addresses that Washington, DC. point to a specific document cannot be accessed American Methanol Institute (1997). "Methanol: The Clear directly after typing the address into a browser. Alternative," Washington, DC. Some web sites do not permit access directly to Antosh, Nelson (1997). "Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Praised," documents without first passing through a higher Houston Chronicle, 26 March, pp. C-1, C-4. directory. Where this is so, we have divided the URL into two parts, the highest directory at which "Assessment of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases from Fuel access can be gained to the web site and then the Cell Vehicles," prepared by (S&T)2 Consultants Inc. for subsequent subdirectory information, which Methanex Corporation, June 2000, Delta, British Columbia, usually will require the researcher to select and Canada. click on the correct options. Ballard Power Systems (1997). "Ballard, Ford, Daimler-Benz to Join Forces to Develop Fuel Cell Technology for Future Vehicles in Over $600 Million Transaction," news release 15 December, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
Berggren, Mark A. (1997). "Mega-Methanol - Methane Madness vs. Money Maker," 1997 World Methanol Conference, 8-10 December. Houston, TX: Chemical Market Associates, Inc.
50 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE Blumenstein, Rebecca (1998). "Auto Industry Reaches Pitman, pp. 727-729. Surprising Consensus: It Needs New Engines," Wall Street Dow Jones Newswires (2000). "U.S. OPIC OKs Largest Journal, January 5, p. A-1. African Investment for $450M Plant", 14 June 2000, Dow Brown, Stuart F. (1998). "The Automakers’ Big-Time Bet on Jones & Company. Fuel Cells," Fortune, 30 March, p. 122ff. Economist (1997). "At Last, the Fuel Cell," 25 October, pp. Business Week (1997). "Gas to Oil: A Gusher for the 89-91. Millennium?" 19 May, pp. 131-132. Edwards, Neil, Suzanne R. Ellis, et al. (1998). "On-Board California Energy Commission (1996). "Methanol Fueling Hydrogen Generation for Transport Applications: The System Installation and Maintenance Manual," California HotSpot Methanol Processor," Journal of Power Sources, Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA. forthcoming.
Campbell, Colin J., (1998). "The End of Cheap Oil," Ekhtera, M. Reza, G. Ali Mansoori, et al. (1997). "Supercritical Scientific American, March, pp. 78-83. Fluid Extraction for Remediation of Contaminated Soil," in Supercritical Fluids: Extraction and Pollution Prevention, eds. Clean Fuels Report (1997). "State Taxes on Motor Vehicle Martin A. Abraham and Aydin K. Sunol, Division of Industrial Fuels," November, pp. 60-61. and Engineering Chemistry, Inc., 24-28 March, 211th Coalbed Methane Association of Alabama (1995). National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, New "History of Coalbed Methane in Alabama," available Orleans, LA. ACS Symposium Series No. 670, pp. 280-298. http://coalbed.com/ subdirectory history.html. Ellington, Rex T., and Mark Meo (1991). "Calculating the ConVault (1998). "The Above Ground Solution to the Net Greenhouse Warming Effect of Renewable Energy Underground Problem," McLean, VA, ConVault Mid- Resources: Methanol from Biomass," Journal of Atlantic, Inc. Environmental Systems, v. 20, no. 4, pp. 287-301.
Crocco, James R. (1997). "The Ever-Changing World Energy Information Administration (2000). "International Methanol Outlook," 8 December, World Methanol Energy Outlook 2000 - With Projections to 2020, page 59, Conference. Chemical Market Associates, Inc. "Gas-to-Liquids Technology: The Current Picture," Energy Information Administration, Office of Integrated Analysis DaimlerChrysler (1998). "NECAR3: A Methanol Car Hits the and Forecasting, U.S. Dept. of Energy, Washington, DC. Road." Energy Information Administration (1997). "International Department of Energy (1998). "Fuel Cells for Transportation: Energy Outlook 1997: Appendix A: World Total Energy Program Implementation Strategy," Office of Advanced Consumption Reference Case," Energy Information Automotive Technologies, U.S. Dept. of Energy, Washington, Administration, Office of Oil and Gas, U.S. Dept. of Energy, DC. Washington, DC. Department of Transportation (1997). "Fuel Cell Bus," Available http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo97/appal.html. Office of Transportation Technology, U.S. Dept. of Energy, ENVIRON (1996). "Hazard Assessment for Human and Washington, DC. Environmental Health: Methanol," Arlington VA.March. Dillon, William (1992). "Gas (Methane) Hydrates - A New ENVIRON (1997). "Methanol Pharmacokinetics and Frontier," U.S. Geological Survey, Marine and Coastal Implications for Safe Exposure Levels," Arlington, VA. Geology Program. Available http://marine.usgs.gov/fact- August. sheets. Environmental Protection Agency (1997). "Motor Oil Facts," Dobrynin, V.M., Y.P. Korotajev, and DV Plyuschev (1981). available http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/seahome/house- "Gas Hydrates: A Possible Energy Resource," in Long-Term waste/ in subdirectories /src/oilfact.htm. Energy Resources, eds. R.F. Meyer and J.C. Olson. Boston:
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 51 Environmental Protection Agency. (1993). "Methanol Fuels Hymass, Richard (1997). "The Impact of New Methanol and Fire Safety," Fact Sheet OMS-8, January, Office of Mobile Technology on Global Markets," 1997 World Methanol Sources, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC. Conference, Tampa, FL. London, U.K.: Kvaerner Process Technology. Environmental Protection Agency (1993). "Methanol Basics," Fact Sheet OMS-7, January, EPA 400-F-982-009, Hymass, Richard (1997). "Low Priced Methanol for the New Office of Mobile Sources, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC. Millennium," 1999 World Methanol Conference, San Diego, CA. London, U.K.: Kvaerner Process Technology. E-Sources (1998). "E-Sources Special Topic: Fuel Cells," available http://www.e-sources.com/ in subdirectory Jet Propulsion Laboratory (1997). "New Fuel Cell Shows fuelcell.html. Promise for Zero-Emission Vehicles," 24 February, Public Information Office, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California "Evaluation of the Fate and Transport of Methanol in the Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA. Environment", prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. for the American Methanol Institute, January 1999. Jordan, Jim (1999). "A Global Overview of Methanol," 1999 Dewitt Global Conference on MTBE/Oxygenates/Methanol, Frost, J.C. (1997). "Fuel Cell System for Transport Houston, TX: Dewitt & Co. Inc. Applications Including On-Board HotSpot Reformer," 20-22 October, Commercializing Fuel Cell Vehicles 97, Frankfurt, Journal of Power Sources (1996). "Proceedings of the Germany, Intertech Conferences, 1997. Reading, United Fourth Grove Fuel Cell Symposium: Opportunities, Kingdom, Johnson Matthey. Progress, and Challenges," London, UK, 19-22 September 1995," v. 61, nos. 1-2, July-August 1996. Gamlin, Tim, Robert Schneider and Muhammad Islam (2000). "Strategies for Low Cost Methanol Production," 29- Kelly, Ed (1999). "The U.S. Natural Gas Market 30 June 2000, EPTC 2000, Prague, Czech Republic, 2000. Outlook", 1999 Dewitt Global Conference on Kvaerner Process Technology, Kvaerner Engineering and MTBE/Oxygenates/Methanol, Houston, TX. Kingwood, Construction. TX: Cambridge Energy Research Associates.
Georgetown University (1998). "Clean Quiet Transit Buses Kinney, Patrick L., and Robert Kavet (1987). "The Health Are Here Today," Georgetown University Advanced Vehicle Effects of Methanol Vapor: The Health Effects Institute’s Development, Washington, DC. Analysis," Cambridge, MA: Health Effects Institute.
Gottesfeld, Shimshon (1996). "Polymer Electrolyte Direct Koch, G., and H. Siegrist (1997). "Denitrification with Methanol Fuel Cells: An Option for Transportation Methanol in Tertiary Filtration at Wastewater Treatment Applications," 17-19 September 1996, Commercializing Fuel Plant Zurich-Werdholzli," in Water, Science, and Cell Vehicles. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, Technology: A Journal of the International Association on NM. Water Pollution Research, v. 36, no. 1, pp. 165-172.
Grigsby, Brian (1999). "U.S. Methanol - Evolution for Some, Kopinsky, Don (1993). "The Evidence for Low-Dose Extinction for Others?" 1999 World Methanol Conference, Methanol Toxicity," Technical Report EPA-AA-EVRB-93-01, San Diego, CA: CMAI. Ann Arbor, MI: U.S. EPA.
Halpert, Gerald, Todd Marsh, et al. (1997). "The Direct Kvaerner (1998). "Kvaerner Process - Technology Methanol Liquid-Feed Fuel Cell," Pasadena, CA: Jet Newsletter." Propulsion Laboratory, 15 January. Larson, Eric D., and Ryan E. Katofsky (1992). "Production of Halpert, Gerald (1996). "Key Issues for Direct Methanol Fuel Methanol and Hydrogen from Biomass," PU/CEES Report Cells," 17-19 September 1996, Commercializing Fuel Cell no. 271, July, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Vehicles, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA. School of Engineering and Applied Science, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. Hydrogen-Gazette (1998). "Opel Presents Fuel Cell Vehicle," 20 March. Available www.HyWeb.de/gazette-e. Lewis, Raymond (1997). "Methanol Fuel Cell Development:
52 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE Promise for the Future," 1997 World Petrochemical National Renewable Energy Laboratory (1995). "Methanol Conference, Houston, TX. Chemical Market Associates, Inc. from Biomass." U.S. Department of Energy, NREL/SP-420- 5570-Rev.2. Washington, DC. Lewis, Raymond (1996). "New Technology for Direct Methanol Fuel Cells and the Infrastructure to Supply Them," Nowell, Gregory P. (1994). "On the Road with Methanol: 17-19 September 1996, Commercializing Fuel Cell Vehicles. The Present and Future Benefits of Methanol Fuel," Washington, DC: American Methanol Institute. prepared for American Methanol Institute, Washington, DC, Mountain View, CA: Arcadis (formerly Acurex Liebner, Waldemar (1999). "Lurgi’s Multi Purpose Environmental). Gasification-Methanol Syngas from Solid, Liquid and Gaseous Feedstocks", 1999 World Methanol Conference, Oil and Gas Journal (1997). "U.S. Gas Resource Estimate San Diego, CA. Frankfurt, Germany: Lurgi Ol-Chemie. Up 6% in Two Years," April 21, v. 95, no. 16, p. 23.
Machiele, Paul (1990). "Summary of the Fire Safety Impacts Oil and Gas Journal (1996). "Technology Spurs Growth of of Methanol as a Transportation Fuel," U.S. Coalbed Methane," v. 24, no. 1, January 1, pp. 56-63. Government/Industry Exposition, May 1-4, Washington, Oil and Gas Journal (1993). "Methanol Plant Design DC; S.A.E. Paper 90113; Warrendale, PA: S.A.E. Choices Affect Operations, Costs, Other Equipment," International. March 29, pp. 53-57. Mark, Jason (1997). "Environmental and Infrastructure Prensky, Stephen (1995). "Hydrate Resources Trade-Offs for Fuel Cell Vehicles," SAE Technical Paper Estimation," available http://www.gsj.go.jp/dMG Series 972693, Future Transportation Technology subdirectory/hydrate/hydrate.resources.html. Conference, August 6-8, San Diego, CA. Rice, Dudley (1997). "Coalbed Methane - An Untapped Mark, Jason (1996). "Zeroing Out Pollution: The Promise of Energy Resource and an Environmental Concern," Energy Fuel Cell Vehicles," Union of Concerned Scientists, May. Resource Surveys Program, U.S. Geological Survey, Fact Materials Transportation Bureau (1985). "The Transport of Sheet FS-019-97. Available http://energy.usgs.gov/ subdi- Methanol by Pipeline," U.S. Dept. of Transportation, rectory /factsheets/coalbed/coalmeth.html. Materials Transportation Bureau, Research and Special San Jose Mercury News (1997). "Engine Evolution: Programs Administration, Washington, DC. Accelerating the Move Away from Fossil Fuels," 26 March. "Methanol in Fuel Cell Vehicles: Human Toxicity and Risk Short, Glyn, and Laura Antonio (1997). "Methanol in Evaluation," prepared by Statoil, 12 December 1999. Gasoline and Diesel Engines: Environmental Mitchell, William L. (1997). "Fuel-Flexible Fuel Processors Considerations," 1997 World Methanol Conference. for Transportation," 21 October 1997, Commercializing Imperial Chemical Industries Americas Inc., Wilmington, Fuel Cell Vehicles 1997, Cambridge, MA: Arthur D. Little. DE.
Monastersky, Rich (1996). "The Mother Lode of Natural Gas: Short, Glyn (1999). "A Methanol Maritime Spillage Methane Hydrates Stir Tales of Hope and Hazard" Science Scenario - What if the Exxon Valdez Had Carried News, 9 November. Methanol?" 1999 World Methanol Conference, San Diego, California. Hockessin, DE. Morton, Lawrence, Norman Hunter, and Hyman Gesser (1990). "Methanol: A Fuel for Today and Tomorrow," Shu, Lijn, Jeremy C. Nesheim, et al. (1997). "An Feiv2O2 Chemistry and Industry, 16 July, pp. 457-462. Diamond Core Structure for the Key Intermediate of Methane Monooxygenase," Science, 24 January, v. 275, Murray, Charles N., ed. (1998). "H2-Methanol-CO2 Cycle," pp. 515-517. Joint Research Center European Commission, available http://me-www.jrc.it/diox/methanol Sperling, Daniel (1997). "Rethinking the Car of the subdirectory methanol-co2-0.html. Future," Issues in Science and Technology, Winter 1996-
THE PROMISE OF METHANOL FUEL CELL VEHICLES 53 1997, pp. 29-34. Stokes, Charles A. (1997). "Why the Global Warming Issue Is Important to the Methanol Industry," Stokes Consulting Sperling, Daniel (1997). "A New Agenda," Access, No. 11, Group. Fall, pp. 2-9. Stork, K., M. Singh, et al. (1997). "Assessment of Capital Requirements for Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Under the PNGV Program." Argonne National Laboratory.
Swift News (1997). "Methanol to Boost Natural Gas Demand," v. 11, no. 3, pp. 3-4.
Tanahashi, M. (1996). "Messoyahkha Gas Field: The First Commercial Hydrate Deposits?" available http://www.gsj.go.jp/dMG/hydrate/Messoyakha.html .
TeraMeth Industries (n.d.). "On-Site Methanol Production," Walnut Creek, Calif.
Toyota Motor Corp. (1997). "Toyota New Developments: The Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle," International Automobile Association, Frankfurt 1997.
Toyota Motor Corp. (1997). "Water: The Only Emission from the Power Source of the Future," available http://www.toyota.co.jp/e/green subdirectory cell.html.
Unnasch, Stefan and Louis Browning (2000). "Refinement of Selected Fuel-Cycle Emissions Analysis," February 2000, Mountain View, CA: A.D. Little. California Air Resources Board Contract No. 98-339
Unnasch, Stefan (2000). "Fuel Cell Energy Conversion Efficiency Analysis," prepared for the California Energy Commission and the Air Resources Board, May 2000, Mountain View, CA.
Williams, Robert H., E.D. Larson, R.E. Katofsky, and Jeff Chen (1995). "Methanol and Hydrogen from Biomass for Transportation: With Comparisons to Methanol and Hydrogen from Natural Gas and Coal," Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Princeton University, June 27, U.S. EPA Symposium on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Mitigation Research, Washington, DC.
Wilson, Kevin A. (1997). "The Fuel Cell Sell," Autoweek, 3 March 1997, pp. 12-14.
Woods, Theodore (1995). "Zero-Emission Vehicle Technology Assessment," prepared for New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, NYSERDA Report 95-11. McLean, VA: Booz-Allen and Hamilton, Inc.
54 BEYOND THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE
For more information about the American Methanol Institute, call us at 1-888-275-0768, or drive by our web site at www.methanol.org.
800 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 620 Washington, DC 20006 Telephone 1-888-275-0768 • Facsimile 202-331-9055 email: [email protected]
www.methanol.org